Posted on 09/18/2018 3:38:53 PM PDT by detective
No idea what this means. Presumably she wants the GOP to agree not to question Christine Blasey Ford about her personal background, e.g., sexual habits, drinking habits, and so forth, such that the hearing ends up with Ford being dragged through the mud.
I’m in the minority among the commentariat, though, in believing that it’s unlikely they’ll do that anyway. The optics of the hearing are already so terrible for Republicans, and the damage among women voters already so potentially grave, that they’ll be respectful of Ford out of self-interest if nothing else. Barring an unlikely meltdown of credibility at the hearing by Ford, it’s already a no-win situation for Republicans. Why make it worse by putting her through the wringer?
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
With this case, even of FB, there are some women who are defending her, of course. But what's interesting even there is how many gals see right through her.
Count me in!
I think that it’s important to remember that this story is fabricated and cannot be verified. Therefore any elements of the story that have reached the public can be changed today, tomorrow, or next week. The number of boys have already changed from four to two, and since the second boy has also said that he has no recollection of this event, then this little soap opera can be reinvented whenever necessary.
I think that this professor has just figured out that she is being used by the left but they will left her slowly twisting in the wind if necessary. She ought to stay in Palo Alto and enjoy the rest of her life before this blows up in her face.
Not only No, but I would tell her that if it can ever be proven that she made it all up then she will do some serious time.
Questions for her:
9. Why did you scrub your social media sites???????????
I just read Flake is now saying she has the option of a closed hearing with or without cameras if that would make her more comfortable.
I also read where Grassley is saying they are allowed only two witnesses each.
If it's already a "no win", then what have they got to lose by putting her thru the truth wringer?
Sounds more like a nothing to lose and everything to win situation............Sheesh
Subpoena her.
“serious conditions” - yeah, probably like Kavanaugh doesn’t get to say a word and Ford gets to give one emotional, self-pitying monologue and then leave without answering one question from anyone - she’s a supposedly educated, sophisticated, conscientious woman who tried to drop an anonymous, vague to the point of being unanswerable accusation on a man of integrity and honor, then slink off into the night without taking any responsibility or accountability for her actions - she doesn’t deserve a hearing, except maybe by the America Psychological Association for violating their code of ethics by acting in such a way as to put the field in bad light for the public....
That may not be in the cards and simply drag out an unwinnable situation.
Go for the vote asap after accuser has a timely opportunity to be briefly heard. No matter the outcome, move to the senate and hope if you have enough vulnerable RATs in blue states to make up for the wobbly Rino's in a full senate vote.
She wants to be free to slander and libel a good man, with guarantees she won’t go to prison when she’s found to be a stone liar.
Delay is the objective, nothing else.
Blowsy, Have you made allegations of sexual assault against other men? List and explain.
Why were you being treated by a therapist? Do you have a psychological diagnosis? Are you now, or have you ever been prescribed psychologically-active drugs?
What illegal drugs have you used? Have you ever hallucinated?
What were you trying to hide, by deleting your social media accounts?
Were you offered any inducements whatsoever, for the use of your story, including future deals for afterwards?
“Barring an unlikely meltdown of credibility at the hearing by Ford, it’s already a no-win situation for Republicans. Why make it worse by putting her through the wringer?” If it is a no win, then go for it. Kavanagh has a right to confront his accuser. If he doesn’t then the democrats will try to impeach him in his current position.
Dem stooge can falsely accuse a good, decent man with long judicial and personal record that is clean, and destroy his life,family, career and service to America on the court.
BUT
Other side has to sit with folded hands silently so as not to upset the mentally ill woman because she is a Dem.”
Get it but will nots allow my country to do that. There will be no justice except vigilante justice if that is allowed.
One woman and one letter to Feinstein can destroy a life?? Not in my country.
I agree....it should.
When you grew up in your town I know Sheriff Andy Taylor, Deputy Barney Fife and Aunt Bea never had to frown at you for any behavior.
Actually in 1960-1964 my small city was like yours. We were so lucky.
Great questions for the sleazy prof.
One big problem——
Her ready answers: No and None. And never. (prove her wrong)
How long do the good guys have to investigate all the lies (Rx records , Freedom of Information Act demands for certain documents, her delay in signing things to allow answers from hometown).
You are right about that.
Get going and grill her if she shows up.
I believe she wanted to be a spectacle and a rock star on TV. Like Stormy.
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.