Posted on 09/20/2018 9:20:15 PM PDT by Signalman
Thanks. I’m interested in his motive for doing so, if this is all he had. He has gone out on a limb promising bombshell proof of innocence such that Feinstein will apologize.
I read her “demands” for testifying. They are laughable. I’m surprised she didn’t also demand Kav wear an orange jump suit. She gets the last word and Kav can’t be there? So much for the right of confrontation.
Keep an eye out for her yearbooks. Pretty wild!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vwnm6jWFIT4&t=1279s#menu
From what I read about her HS yearbook, they were a bunch of drunks sluts that could not tell if it was Godzilla.
Or, far more likely, his accuser is a stone liar looking to make a splash.
You're not getting the part where he has almost certainly got Garrett onboard with this?
She knows. She is the legal authority. Would she hug an oak tree or eucalyptus?
Maxine Waters for president and Kamala Harris for veep. Do you want to learn Chinese or Russian?
The indulgences to the left are why we have abortion...etc.
no one should be able to accuse any one with such a flimsy story.....
if anything happened, like groping, like rough kissing, etc, it was 36 yrs ago, the girl was drunk, the girl went into a bedroom the girl does not remember what house it was, how she got there, how she got home and has trouble remembering how many people were there....
its a non story and K should not even address it..
You forgot your sarc tag.
Awfully tough claim to make since she was drunk at the time and cannot remember the date or place of the incident.
The pseudoscience of repressed memory therapy and consequent false memory syndrome weigh more heavily here than mistaken identity.
It is easily surmisable that given the debauchery exposed by the yearbook that drunken parties were the norm for those students, as it is that Ford has unresolved psychiatric issues from her childhood...one of the primary motivations for those seeking study in the field of mental health.
But it is not easily surmisable that a woman who cannot remember when or where has any credibility whatsoever accurately remembers “who”, particularly-given that the witnesses she’s named all contradict her story.
I don’t doubt that something happened to this young woman, but I do doubt that the “trauma” of being groped is accurate.
No, given the tales of drunken parties this man believes it is far more likely young Blasey’s traumatic experience was of vomiting on the object of her drunken amorous activities at the worst possible moment and her therapist having prompted her to fabricate this recollection.
Repressed memories have been roundly discredited and have no merit in this case whatsoever, something I’ve not seen discussed as yet anywhere.
The way this witch is behaving with all these demands, makes me think that she is the nastiest, most vile, most vindictive female in the news today. But, I can’t help thinking that this is what the whole democrat party has become.
She should be given the attention and satisfaction she deserves. NONE.
Our side is stupid.
There shouldn't have been even one. This story is pure garbage, irresponsible, and not at all helpful and yet people supposedly on our side are high-fiving each other over it.
Of course it wasn't! The other guy isn't a conservative judge up for nomination to the SCOTUS.
Considering the nature of the school she attended as attested by the yearbooks turned up yesterday, she could have a hundred cases of “mistaken identity”.
This morning, Ed Whelan tweeted an apology for naming Garrett.
You are correct - I missed that. Thanks.
If the friend cops to this, and, more importantly, fills in the details, things might get interesting.
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 claim made by Hillary Clinton twenty years ago. That has been undeniable for so long that it hales back almost to the time referred to in Mrs. Fords complaint against Judge Kavenaugh.
Even by Ms. Ford's own telling, in the putative incident:
And the truth of the charges alleged by Ms. Ford against Judge Kavenaugh cannot actually matter.
- 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.
- the incident putatively happened way back in 1982. No less than a third of the people who were alive in America in 1982 - have died by now. In that perspective, is Ms. Fords angst actually the only thing that matters?
So the question for Senator Feinstein, is
- It will never be clear that the charges are true - and it will never be clear that they are false. The charge is too indefinite and witness-free. It asks Judge Kavenaugh to prove a negative.
What difference, at this point, does it make?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.