This is an excellent summary of everything wrong with Ford, if you need to explain the problem to someone who only listens to the MSM
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/seedpods_from_the_garden_of_stupid.html
Seedpods from the Garden of Stupid
By Clarice Feldman
Greg Gutfeld looks out on the sea of demonstrators against Brett Kavanaugh this week and characterized the display as “seedpods from the garden of stupid are blooming,” and it’s impossible not to agree. The people who planted those seeds include more than 1,700 law professors who said Kavanaugh should be denied confirmation because he “displayed a lack of judicial temperament” in responding to the baseless, uncorroborated charges by Christine Blasey Ford of sexual misconduct.
Reviewing this campus insanity, Heather MacDonald contends – with ample basis:
The Kavanaugh hysteria has provided the country with a crash course in academic victim politics. The tribal denunciations of “privileged white males,” the moral panic over fantastical accounts of sexual predation, the spectacle of Ivy League law students claiming to feel “unsafe,” the assertion that a single uncorroborated outbreak of male teen hormones should cancel a lifetime of achievement in the law – all originate in the anti-Enlightenment ethos of the academy, embodied in critical race studies, feminist legal theory, and the attacks on the Socratic teaching method as anti-female and anti-”survivor.”
The #BelieveSurvivors mantra is a cornerstone of the campus grievance industry but inimical to everything that a law school should teach. It’s a religious gesture, not a legal one: Such belief is independent of proof, arising out of a pre-existing commitment to a narrative of ubiquitous female abuse by patriarchal white males. The “survivor” label presupposes the conclusion that evidence should establish: that the accused is guilty of an offense. The fact-finder, if there even is one, regards contradictions or holes in a woman’s story as evidence of “trauma” and thus as further corroboration. According to #BelieveSurvivors logic, the Innocence Project, which exists to vacate wrongful convictions and has a presence at law schools across the country, should be disbanded.
Examples abound of student rape allegations arising out of voluntary drunken hookups, following which the self-described victim sought further sexual contact with her alleged rapist. Even if such cases weren’t so common, to presume the guilt of the accused based on an accusation alone would still be an affront to due process.
The current generation of elite law students will one day become judges themselves. If they remain committed to the circular logic of #BelieveSurvivors, the rule of law is in trouble.
Here’s a quick recap of the flimsiness of Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations by an online friend, Max Madison:
She refused to hand over the results of her polygraph
She refused to hand over her 2012 therapist’s notes
She said she was afraid to fly, but has flown dozens of times.
Since she did in fact fly, she offered no other reason for the delay
She said she wanted anonymity but contacted [the Washington Post] multiple times
Said she got advice from “beach friends” but didn’t mention that the primary one was a former FBI lawyer, Monica McLean, who worked for Preet Bharara, a man Trump fired. She also failed to mention, when talking of her Beach friends at the hearing, that Monica was sitting right behind her.
She had a perfect memory of 1982 but couldn’t remember basic things from the previous 10 weeks
She’d been drinking.
She changed the year of the alleged attack
She named 4 people, but had no backers
She couldn’t remember how she got home even though her story had her escaping the house far from home, pre-cell phone.
She gave no location or any details that could be researched for verification.
She never told anyone and never claimed PTSD prior to Kavanaugh’s name circulating 30 years later.
She said that she put the 2nd door on her house because of PTSD, but evidence shows it was to get around zoning laws to create a rentable apartment.
She said she didn’t know that Grassley offered to come to her, even though it was broadcast nationally.
She feigned no knowledge of polygraphs even though her ex’s sworn statement said she’d coached Monica McLean how to beat it in the 1990s, and in any case her profession should have at least well acquainted her with it.
She co-authored a paper on repressed memory creation years before she claimed to have one
Nothing is known of her pharmacology, but given her past alcoholism, her visits to a therapist and her general presentation, odds are high that it’s extensive.
She scrubbed her social media. We know from a pussy hat photo that she was rabidly anti-Trump.
She had zero family or friends with her, not from the 80s nor from today. She was surrounded only by Democrat Party handlers.
Constant cries of bravery & “nothing to gain” vs a $700,000 GoFundMe and a career boosted a la Anita Hill
Literally all there is her word vs all of the above. Not a shred of evidence.
I would add to this excellent summary – one of those she claimed at the “event” in question, Leland Keyser, whom she characterized as a lifelong friend, informed the committee that McLean had pressured her in a vain attempt to get her to change her statement to support Ford’s account.
...
So it looks like another really winning week for the president, as Matthew Continetti (and I) see it – on trade, judicial nominations, the economy, and foreign policy.
Excellent summary. Thank you for posting!
I saw a reference on Liz Crokin’s Twitter that said that Joel Getz (Qs picture of a tall guy walking beneath the Chinese Kindergarten sign and again pictured in red shoes at Tony Podesta’s birthday party) had been ‘busted for drugging and sexually abusing children”. The article she referenced was from 11/17 and doesn’t say that Getz was charged. I can’t find anything more recent. Can anyone find anything more recent?
Getz is tied to the Clinton Foundation. Kind of interesting given Qs post about the Weiner laptop and child abuse today.
thanks for linking us to this.
vivid, accurate and stunning in its simplicity.
it’s a keeper.
great article!! Clarice is a gem!
FBI’s smoking gun: Redactions protected political embarrassment, not ‘national security’
To declassify or not to declassify? That is the question, when it comes to the FBI’s original evidence in the Russia collusion case.
...
consider Footnote 43 on Page 57 of Chapter 3 of the House Intelligence Committee’s report earlier this year on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
...
From the heavy redactions, all one could tell is that FBI general counsel James Baker met with an unnamed person who provided some information in September 2016 about Russia, email hacking and a possible link to the Trump campaign.
Not a reporter or policymaker would have batted an eyelash over such a revelation.
Then, last Wednesday, I broke the story that Baker admitted to Congress in an unclassified setting — repeat, in an unclassified setting — that he had met with a top lawyer at the firm representing the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received allegations from that lawyer about Russia, Trump and possible hacking.
It was the same DNC, along with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, that funded the unverified, salacious dossier by a British intel operative, Christopher Steele, that became a central piece of evidence used to justify the FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign in the final days of the election.
And it was the same law firm that made the payments for the dossier research so those could be disguised in campaign spending reports to avoid the disclosure of the actual beneficiaries of the research, which were Clinton and the DNC.
And it was, in turns out, the same meeting that was so heavily censored by the intel agencies from Footnote 43 in the House report — treated, in other words, as some big national security secret.
What makes this so extraordinary is that the FBI and the DOJ would have Americans believe that a contact with a lawyer for a political party during the middle of the election is somehow a matter of national security that should be hidden from the public.
...