Posted on 09/30/2018 5:56:17 AM PDT by bitt
I agree. I think that is EXACTLY what they did, pored over the book and cherry-picked stuff they could use in crafting their false allegations.
FYI, Judge's book, "Wasted," was published in 1997. I'm doubtful that our side was proactive enough to obtain a copy, which would now be very difficult:
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/good-luck-finding-a-copy-of-mark-judges-wasted-tales-of-a-gen-x-drunk
She wasn’t there. It’s like 11 miles from her house. They were not friends of hers. They didn’t run in the same circles. She’s a nut. For all she can remember it could have been in Toledo.
“Just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.” - George Costanza
In addition to being a hateful pussy hat wearing lib, she is and was back then a very homely and unattractive female who also got short changed in the brains department.
Part of why this lying witch is doing this may be extreme jealousy over the successful career the judge has had.
While she has to work at a 3rd rate community college and lie about her credentials.
This has been mentioned in other articles but not getting the attention I think it deserves...take a look at Kavanaugh’s calendar entry for July 1, 1982 closely and you’ll see the nickname “squi” - we know from Kavanaugh’s testimony that “squi” was a friend named Chris Garrett. This was the same kid that Ed Whelan theorized might have been confused by Ford as Kavanaugh since they have similar facial features, hair, etc.
According to Ford’s testimony, although she didn’t identify Garrett by name, she confirmed that “the person identified by Whelan” (’squi’ - Chris Garrett) was someone she “hung out with and dated a few times” (paraphrasing her testimony). So here’s the kicker - if in fact the July 1 entry on the calendar IS the infamous party where the assault happened, why wouldn’t Ford mention that someone she “dated and hung out with” was there? Similarly, if this assault happened, why wouldn’t she reach out to “squi” Garrett for a statement to at least confirm the party happened?
Add to this little mystery the fact that according to Ford, she left her best friend Leland Keyser behind with two rapists and never bothered to call or talk to her afterward about it, if even to check on her safety.
I know this is politically incorrect to say, but I’m really starting to wonder about the mental stability of Dr Ford. NO, not saying all women who report assaults long after the fact are crazy - but if you were a woman who experienced an assault 37 years ago, finally overcame your trauma to want justice for the event, would your first action be to call the Washington Post “tip line” anonymously? Does that sound like something a rational person would do?
I would love to know how many of the senators passing judgement on Judge Kavanaugh:
1. Have made payouts from the $17M taxpayer-funded sexual harassment Slush/Hush fund?
2. Have serious drinking problems beyond high school beer drinking?
Sheesh!
I wish I kept my 55 Chevy and my 50 Ford Pickup from High School.
She’s Nuts Jim.
The only proper thing to do is to immerse BK in water.
If he doesn’t drown, he’s innocent.
Did she mean the pre-July Fourth party?
What were the fireworks like?
About 30 days earlier...
DANG; I am SO confused!!!
Maybe I was the drunk one and took my OWN clothes off!
Absolutely the key question here, and I fear the American people will never learn to their own demise.
I’ve been saying this for a week Judge’s Tales of a Gen X Drunk is a roman a clef. Names and places and times slightly altered. This is why she cannot get specific. The details aren’t real times or places.
As for her believable performance. She is a mental health professional. If anyone besides a stage actor could pull this off it would be a clinical psychologist, drawing not only on her academics, but on her work with patients.
And in an aside, several years ago a gal I had taught in 7th grade in the 70s wrote a pretty good and successful roman a clef where I, under a different name, made a brief appearance. A reasonably flattering appearance.
The small penis rule is an informal strategy used by authors to evade libel lawsuits. It was described in a New York Times article in 1998:
"For a fictional portrait to be actionable, it must be so accurate that a reader of the book would have no problem linking the two," said Mr. Friedman. Thus, he continued, libel lawyers have what is known as "the small penis rule". One way authors can protect themselves from libel suits is to say that a character has a small penis, Mr. Friedman said. "Now no male is going to come forward and say, 'That character with a very small penis, that's me!'"[1]
The small penis rule was referenced in a 2006 dispute between Michael Crowley and Michael Crichton. Crowley alleged that after he wrote an unflattering review of Crichton's novel State of Fear, Crichton included a character named "Mick Crowley" in the novel Next. The character is a child rapist, described as being a Washington, D.C.-based journalist and Yale graduate with a small penis.[2]
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.