Patterico's Pontifications

9/15/2018

The Latest Efforts To Sink Brett Kavanaugh

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:01 am

[guest post by Dana]

[ I’ve been working on this post for a few days, but because the circumstances are fluid with new information coming out all the time, I’m just going to throw it all together now and let you have at it. If I’ve missed any updates, add them to the comments. ]

Just one week before the confirmation vote was set to happen, Sen. Diane Feinstein passed along information to federal investigators regarding an alleged incident of sexual misconduct involving nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The questionably-timed announcement was intentionally vague, as Feinstein declined to give any details, and redacted the identity of the accuser before handing over the information to the FBI:

The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday that she received information from a person about Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh and referred it to federal investigators — but declined to make public any details, citing confidentiality issues.

The information came in a letter, which describes an alleged episode of sexual misconduct involving Kavanaugh when he was in high school, according to a person familiar with the matter. Democrats on the Judiciary Committee first learned about the contents of the letter at a meeting called at the last minute on Wednesday night. The letter had been relayed to Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) by Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), two people familiar with the matter said.

“That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision,” Feinstein said in a statement. “I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.”

(After last week’s embarrassing fiasco at the confirmation hearings, including the unbecoming theatrics of Kamala Harris and Cory Booker (only to be followed up by Hillary Clinton peddling an already proven lie), this latest effort to block confirmation of the nominee has a whiff of desperation. This especially after Harris’ manipulative and dishonest efforts to take down Kavanaugh ended up being a Big Nothing.)

After the FBI received the information, they passed on opening an investigation:

According to a person familiar with the matter, the FBI does not now plan to launch a criminal investigation of the matter, which would normally be handled by local authorities, if it was within the statute of limitations. The FBI instead passed the material to the White House, as an update to Kavanaugh’s background check, which already had been completed, the person said. The move is similar to what the bureau did when allegations were leveled against former White House aide Rob Porter.

An FBI official said, “Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh’s background file, as per the standard process.”

Also, there is a question about the timing of the announcement:

Ms. Feinstein, who received the letter from Ms. Eshoo’s office this summer, informed fellow Democrats on the Judiciary Committee about its existence and its contents on Wednesday evening but did not share the letter itself.

Sitting on the information and remaining closed-lipped about it both perplexed and frustrated her colleagues:

Sources familiar with Feinstein’s decision suggested that she was acting out of concern for the privacy of the accuser, knowing that the woman would be subject to fierce partisan attacks if she came forward. Feinstein also acted out of a sense that Democrats would be better off focussing on legal, rather than personal, issues in their questioning of Kavanaugh. Sources who worked for other members of the Judiciary Committee said that they respected the need to protect the woman’s privacy, but that they didn’t understand why Feinstein had resisted answering legitimate questions about the allegation. “We couldn’t understand what their rationale is for not briefing members on this. This is all very weird,” one of the congressional sources said. Another added, “She’s had the letter since late July. And we all just found out about it.”

Feinstein’s office later defended her handling of the information:

Senator Feinstein was given information about Judge Kavanaugh through a third party. The Senator took these allegations seriously and believed they should be public. However, the woman in question made it clear she did not want this information to be public. It is critical in matters of sexual misconduct to protect the identity of the victim when they wish to remain anonymous, and the senator did so in this case.

Yet, as Charles C.W. Cooke points out, this isn’t exactly what she did:

But Feinstein hasn’t done that. Rather, by trickling out bombshell insinuations while denying anyone a chance to evaluate them, she’s played both sides. Worse still, having caused a cynical one-way firestorm, she’s now praising herself for her discretion.

Now, about the alleged incident:

In the letter, the woman alleged that, during an encounter at a party, Kavanaugh held her down, and that he attempted to force himself on her. She claimed in the letter that Kavanaugh and a classmate of his, both of whom had been drinking, turned up music that was playing in the room to conceal the sound of her protests, and that Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She was able to free herself. Although the alleged incident took place decades ago and the three individuals involved were minors, the woman said that the memory had been a source of ongoing distress for her, and that she had sought psychological treatment as a result.

It doesn’t say whether the this was reported to law enforcement at the time.

Kavanaugh emphatically denies that this ever happened:

I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.

Also, Kavanaugh’s classmate has gone on the record to counter the accuser’s claims. Mark Judge, a writer in Washington, D.C. told the Weekly Standard:

“It’s just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.”

Judge says he first learned he was named in the letter during an interview with the New Yorker. “[Ronan Farrow] said: As you know, you’re named in the letter. And I did not know,” he said.

The Kavanaugh classmate told TWS that the New Yorker did not provide him the name of the woman alleging wrongdoing, a specific date of the alleged incident, or the location where the incident is alleged to have occurred. The woman alleging misconduct has requested that her identity be protected, according to media reports.

I asked Judge if he could recall any sort of rough-housing with a female student back in high school (an incident that might have been interpreted differently by parties involved). “I can’t. I can recall a lot of rough-housing with guys. It was an all-boys school, we would rough-house with each other,” he said said. “I don’t remember any of that stuff going on with girls.”

Yesterday, 65 women who knew Brett Kavanaugh in high school sent a letter to Senators Grassley and Feinstein outlining their support for the nominee:

We are women who have known Brett Kavanaugh for more than 35 years and knew him while he attended high school between 1979 and 1983. For the entire time we have known Brett Kavanaugh, he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect. We strongly believe it is important to convey this information to the Committee at this time.

The signers of this letter hold a broad range of political views. Many of us are not lawyers, but we know Brett Kavanaugh as a person. And he has always been a good person.

(Responding to skeptics, Virginia Hume, who also signed the letter, explained how the letter came about.)

If this ends up being nothing but a smear campaign, Allapundit reminds us about the long-term impact of such a campaign:

Speculation like we’re engaged in right now is precisely what the smear would be designed to achieve. They can’t stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation but they can certainly try to delegitimize him, whether to call his decisions on the Court into question among liberals or to goose turnout for their party this fall or both. The sensational detail about referring the matter to the FBI is a master stroke of ratf*cking: No matter where this goes now, even if it completely disappears off the national radar screen, it’ll pass into progressive lore that Kavanaugh is some sort of sex criminal who not only doesn’t deserve to be on the bench but should actually be doing time somewhere…

It will stay on the national radar for awhile, though, as either Feinstein or Eshoo or one of their staffers is destined to leak something. Maybe liberals will end up spinning it out into their very own version of QAnon. “Breadcrumbs” about the secret Feinstein letter all the way to Election Day.

So here we are: Sen. Feinstein never asked Kavanaugh about the alleged incident, nor brought it to his attention, whether behind closed doors or during the hearing. Further, she did not tell her colleagues on the committee that she had the information. The identity of the accuser remains unknown. The accuser does not want to pursue the matter any further. The vote is scheduled for next week to confirm Kavanaugh.

Sen. Orrin Hatch released a statement expressing his frustration with this turn of events. In part:

I do not intend to allow Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation to be stalled because of an 11th hour accusation that Democrats did not see fit to raise for over a month. The Senator in the best position to determine the credibility of these accusations made the conscious decision not to take action on them, and the authorities to whom the accusations have been referred have decided not to take action either.

Every accuser deserves to be heard. But a process of verification is also necessary. In this case, the accusations were made in a private letter, which has been misrepresented in a number of media stories, from an accuser who has declined to go public and has asked for privacy. The letter sent to investigators has had her name redacted, meaning no further investigation could take place. The claims are wholly unverifiable, and come at the tail-end of a process that was already marred by ugly innuendo, dishonesty, and the nastiest form of our politics. The American people deserve much better from the Senate as an institution.

Yet, in spite of everything, this appears to be where the dial has moved:

Untitled

Personally speaking, I couldn’t have expressed it any better:

If this Kavanaugh charge is true, damn him. If it isn’t, damn the accusers — because a charge like this leaves a mark hard to efface.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

285 Responses to “The Latest Efforts To Sink Brett Kavanaugh”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (023079)

  2. A lot of my views on this were solidified by the fact that Ronan Farrow ran an article on it yesterday in which he described the content of the letter. Ronan Farrow is on a one-man crusade to rid the world of powerful men who are sexually abusive, a crusade that is deeply personal to him for reasons having to do with the way he and his family were hurt by a powerful sexual predator, and I do not believe *he* is engaged in a partisan witch hunt; he’s engaged in a completely seperate witch hunt that has nothing to do with partisan politics.

    I am confident the letter exists and that it says what he says it does.

    But the letter could be a smear attempt. Farrow believes it, obviously, but of course he would.

    So how can I tell if the letter is legitimate or not? Kavanaugh and his friend have an obvious reason to lie, but at the same time, a crazy partisan might also be lying.

    On the evidence intellectual integrity requires me to suspend judgment.

    That said, i’m pretty irked at Feinstein. I think I understand what she was thinking — this isn’t enough to derail the nomination, let’s keep it quiet and focus on other things that might help us make the case for impeachment or court packing later — but if she thinks it’s at all a credible complaint, sitting on it for months is *wrong*; and if she thinks it isn’t a credible complaint, releasing it is wrong.

    So for me the upshot is i’ve moved back into the de Leon camp.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  3. Meh. What’s the big deal w/t self-Righteous crowd? It’s just a SCOTUS gig. It’s not like he’s up for a spot as a priest or cardinal in the Catholic church.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  4. So I had a conversation on FB, which is something I should have known better than to do but i’m human :), which started before we knew the details of the allegation and ended well after we did.

    My original premise was that if there was a credible allegation of *rape*, then the nomination should be done, but if it was mere sexual harassment, well, that’s not the kind of thing i think it’s reasonable to hold against a teenager thirty years later.

    The person misinterpreted me and thought that I was saying that rape was not something we should hold against a teenager thirty years later, largely because I was inartful in how I said it, and so we had an interchange about that.

    For a lot of women, particularly but not exclusively left-leaning women, the idea of a rapist on the supreme court is horrifying and threatening.

    Now, this is not to say that Kavanaugh *is* a rapist. As I said in my last comment, in this kind of he-said/she-said situation where both sides have incentives to lie, it’s really unfair to do anything other than try really hard to suspend judgment.

    But it explains the intensity of the reaction in certain circles, I think. And I think it’s understandable, if regrettable, for anyone who *has* been raped or been the victim of attempted rape, and whose perpetrator denied it and walked away — I think it’s perfectly understandable for those women (and those men, because men get raped too) to simply not believe Kavanaugh.

    Which makes it all the more detestable a lie, if it is a lie.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  5. THANK YOU so much for posting on the ridiculous demarc from civility/common sense/due process and Feinstein’s outrageous actions. This is much more newsworthy than recent posts (extra credit for not saying if Feinstein’s face was punchable).

    Losing control of the Senate or the House is going to put way too much power into the hands of these deranged jackals, but it’s still only a matter of time. Sad to say that having a justice like Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS may be one of the last stopgaps in my lifetime to full-bore government insanity.

    And just wow leave it to the Left. They actually use 65 women vouching for his character as something fishy/obvious/damning.

    The hunt for another contemporary female to continue the public verbal stoning must be intense.

    harkin (7f4688)

  6. “Farrow believes it, obviously, but of course he would.”

    He also believed the classmate knew of the letter, which he said he didn’t.

    And a lot of people in CA think Feinstein did this as a purely political move because she’s up for re-election, the CA Democratic Party refused to endorse her and she was surprised at how much heat she took for apologizing to Kavanaugh for his treatment during the hearings. She might be thinking she better go full Lefty or she’ll lose the gig.

    harkin (7f4688)

  7. Harkin — the thing the left finds fishy is that the 65 women were ready to defend his character on the spot. We find it fishy because that *implies* that they knew *before yesterday* that defending would be needed, as otherwise they wouldn’t have been ready so quickly.

    My bet is this means Grassley knew about the contents of the letter before yesterday (which seems like it would be normal procedure, for Feinstein to pass the information to the Committee Chair) and he organized the defense. That isn’t nearly as nefarious as the activists would make it seem.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  8. Feinstein is in no danger of losing the gig, as much as I wish she were, and the people who think she is are not paying attention to California polling. Yeah, there’s discontent, particularly but not exclusively on the left. But that’s not going to be enough to sink her candidacy.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  9. “It’s just absolutely nuts. I never saw [insert name here] act that way.”

    Lynda voiced a similar assertion about her pal, Les.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  10. Yeah, “i’ve never seen [x] act that way” is hard, because while people’s reputations *do* matter, and they *may* be indicative, they may also not be. People know what they know and see what they see, and it’s reasonable to extend trust based on that, but the fact that I trust someone and can’t imagine them doing some horrible thing doesn’t mean they aren’t when i’m not around. So my character defense isn’t enough to prove they didn’t do something — but it’s enough to make it seem less likely.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  11. That Feinstein sat on that letter since last July says just about enough.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  12. “Now, this is not to say that Kavanaugh *is* a rapist. As I said in my last comment, in this kind of he-said/she-said situation where both sides have incentives to lie, it’s really unfair to do anything other than try really hard to suspend judgment.

    Ridiculous but understandable considering the Obama-era new rules on due process and sexual harassment/rape claims.

    An anonymous claim of ‘something’ alleged but never brought out for over three decades vs a lifetime of behavior patterns, endorsements from just about every person he’s ever dealt with and a spotless record.

    The most deranged reactions have been those insisting she must be believed, that she has no obligation to provide her name or any other info but that Kavanaugh’s name/life/career must be ruined immediately.

    harkin (7f4688)

  13. Squawking to the Weekly Standard don’t cut it. Go under oath at a hearing. So it takes another week. What’s the hurry? Oh… right.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  14. What about that anonymous report that Maxine Waters once talked to a Chinese spy about doing “things” with a Shetland pony while in high school.

    You know it can’t be true. I mean … high school !!

    Neo (d1c681)

  15. kooky how the same people what were so shamefully quick to judge Roy Moore are defending sex abuser brett kavanaugh

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  16. So did Feinstein sit on this for months because it wasn’t substantiated by either the accuser willing to go on the record or a second source? It finally came out from other folks, then she passed it on. You’d think she’d have leaked this when it came to her, that just seems odd.

    I’ve always been meh on Kavanaugh, he seems like a perfectly adequate federal judge, but I’ve never seen him as someone who is SCOTUS material, he’s fine, probably the least of the conservative justices on the court now, Republican Kagan basically. Fine, but I’m not excited about him.

    His weird devotion to the Nationals is just odd, spending that much money on the Nats just seems like a real problem. I mean it’s not like it’s the Reds, oh, wait, nevermind. My childhood Big Red Machine hangover is very, very long.

    Colonel Klink (825c4e)

  17. @15. When you’re right, you’re Right, eh, Mr. Feet?!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  18. Well a,pattern does suggest itself what proffered piece of evidence will pull the trap door this time.

    Narciso (1208a7)

  19. “the thing the left finds fishy is that the 65 women were ready to defend his character on the spot. We find it fishy because that *implies* that they knew *before yesterday* that defending would be needed, as otherwise they wouldn’t have been ready so quickly.”

    Just so amazing that people see nothing wrong/strange with social media being whipped into a frenzy in minutes to destroy someone but oh my goodness sixty five women who knew him were able get together in a day and say he was a good guy.

    Just my experience with Classmates dot com when something goes down makes this seem very reasonable.

    And oh by the way they all put their names on the letter.

    harkin (7f4688)

  20. Hope springs eternal, the nats haven’t done this bad, one might say Glenn Simpson dissembled on more than one occasion.

    Narciso (1208a7)

  21. “Big Red Machine”

    Best lineup in my lifetime, and I bleed Dodger Blue.

    Those NL West battles were awesome.

    harkin (7f4688)

  22. @11/@16. Meh. Might want to check the timeline on it. The news of it may have just broken in public but the actual letter and referral to the FBI may have been done some time ago. But to be fair to the guy, why rush him through; add a week or two to investigate; the ‘victim’ really can’t remain unidentified for this to have any cache and she is going to have go public.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  23. @14. Meh. We need to keep sex offenders out of the SCOTUS and in the Catholic church where they belong.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  24. NBC News
    @NBCNews
    Next Thursday, FEMA will do its first test of a system that allows the president to send a message to most U.S. cellphones.
    __ _

    Alyssa Milano
    @Alyssa_Milano
    I don’t want this. How do we opt out, @fema?
    I know trump isn’t big on consent but I don’t consent to this.
    __ _

    Stephen Miller
    @redsteeze
    Breaking: Actress discovers conservatism.

    harkin (7f4688)

  25. Having helped establish the Roy Moore smear blueprint, altNeverTrump must be absolutely torn on which way to go with this.

    Munroe (c9a127)

  26. I’m not NeverTrump but this is easy for me, Munroe. Moore’s accusers came forward so we could test their stories/credibility and decide for ourselves, which is how it works in politics (not law). Kavanaugh’s accuser has not come forward so she has no credibility to test and there is nothing to believe.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  27. Aphrael @ 7,

    the thing the left finds fishy is that the 65 women were ready to defend his character on the spot. We find it fishy because that *implies* that they knew *before yesterday* that defending would be needed, as otherwise they wouldn’t have been ready so quickly.

    My bet is this means Grassley knew about the contents of the letter before yesterday (which seems like it would be normal procedure, for Feinstein to pass the information to the Committee Chair) and he organized the defense.

    This is from the Virginia Hume link above:

    On Friday, a group of women who knew Brett in high school sent a letter in support of him to Senators Grassley and Feinstein. I am one of those 65 women. Having seen some of the reaction to the letter, I’d like to clear up a few things:

    The letter was conceived and drafted by friends of Brett’s, and it was drafted after allegations came out on Thursday. I learned about the letter from a friend and fellow signatory. Others learned about it the same way. Those surprised at the speed with which it came together should see it as yet another testament to Brett’s excellent reputation.

    Dana (023079)

  28. Kavanaugh’s accuser has not come forward so she has no credibility to test and there is nothing to believe.

    Bingo.

    Dave (445e97)

  29. It’s difficult for me to wade through any suspicions or doubts that the left may express, given the way that they are casting unfounded and ugly aspersions at both Kavanaugh and the GOP:

    Republicans’ gross responses to assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh
    The GOP reacted by pointing out there are women Kavanaugh didn’t rape.

    It’s vicious, and further demonstrates no serious interest in finding out what it is really true, but instead a narrative that they are determined to push to help push out Kavnaugh.

    Dana (023079)

  30. harkin @ 5,

    THANK YOU so much for posting on the ridiculous demarc from civility/common sense/due process and Feinstein’s outrageous actions

    As I quoted Jay Nordlinger at the end of the post (as it sums up my feelings):

    If this Kavanaugh charge is true, damn him. If it isn’t, damn the accusers— because a charge like this leaves a mark hard to efface.

    I think we need to remember that none of us here have seen the actual letter. It’s all be relayed to us by individuals who have their own vested interests in seeing a certain outcome.

    Dana (023079)

  31. @26. ‘Rolling disclosure’ isn’t pleasant, DRJ. So suspect this won’t be a one or two day story. Wouldn’t wish this on anyone on either side. Still believe that, for the most part, once these people get their lifetime gigs secured, they are freed to drift away from the ideologues who pushed them; they just want to do law. But if other women start to surface, it won’t be pretty. But sooner or later someone is going to have to go public and put a name to it.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  32. happyfeet @ 15,

    kooky how the same people what were so shamefully quick to judge Roy Moore are defending sex abuser brett kavanaugh

    There are obvious differences between Roy Moore accusations and this one against Kavanagh. The most critical being that credible accusers came forward and went on record with their detailed accusations re Moore. Also, Kavanaugh was 17 years old when this allegedly took place. Moore was an adult who was accused of being involved with a minor.

    Dana (023079)

  33. Funny how a letter forwarded to the FBI gets looked into while a note of similar content sent to the Pope gets filed.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  34. Munroe @ 25,

    Having helped establish the Roy Moore smear blueprint, altNeverTrump must be absolutely torn on which way to go with this.

    They are not the same thing, so therefore the “Never Trumpers” will likely not be torn one bit over this. Also, it’s hard to feel torn over something about which you know little about. Basically, we are going by other people’s versions, and cannot hear/read the accusation from the alleged victim herself, nor any of the surrounding details. See #32.

    Dana (023079)

  35. Psychiatric patient anonymously accuses sitting Court of Appeals Judge and now Supreme Court nominee of sexually harassing her forty years ago when he was seventeen. Ok, then.

    nk (9651fb)

  36. you add this assault accusation to his sick pattern of seeking out the company of young girls and you have a toxic stew of perversion

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  37. Go under oath at a hearing.

    Yes, the accuser should go under oath at a hearing.

    So it takes another week. What’s the hurry? Oh… right.

    That sword cuts both ways: you can just as easily accuse one side of making baseless accusations in order to delay the vote as you can the other side of wanting to speed it up.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  38. But sooner or later someone is going to have to go public and put a name to it.

    You would think so, especially given how politics works — they know how to make a series out of a one-day article. But that opens the accuser up to scrutiny, and every year the scrutiny gets more intense.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  39. “So for me the upshot is i’ve moved back into the de Leon camp“

    Time is growing short to vacate that camp. This camp will take California even further down the Road of No Return.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  40. Just another in a long line of shameless Democrat smears.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  41. Is this a good way for Feinstein to draw attention away from her employment of a Chinese spy for nearly two decades.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  42. Realize that due to the way California’s primaries work, my choices in the general election are Feinstein and de Leon. For the rest of this year, those and “i refuse to vote” are the only camps available.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  43. That could be true, Haiku. The odds are probably good for that. But it does happen that people come forward with stories as they get older and/or as the person accused gains prominence. If you believe them, IMO the proper response is to encourage them to go public with their story, but doing that may not be the best thing to expose someone to who has been victimized in the past. However, despite the #MeToo movement, it’s not all about victims. It’s also about due process for the accused.

    DRJ (15874d)

  44. altNeverTrump must be absolutely torn on which way to go with this.

    Where’s the evidence that the so-called “NeverTrumpers” are “torn” at all over this anonymous charge? As far as I’ve seen, Trump-critics on the right generally believe that dirty tricks are being pulled on Kavanaugh, but as Dana points out, the Moore case was different in important ways.

    Some people are sneeringly labeled “NeverTrump” because they have the nerve to ask that consistent standards of judgment be applied, with no special exemptions for Donald Trump, or his allies.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  45. Another point: the so-called NeverTrumpers appear to be capable of evaluating the attacks on Kavanaugh (or Niki Haley) quite independently of what they think of Trump personally. It isn’t all about the image or ego of Donald Trump.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  46. Many folks are forgetting the new standards about what can be considered rape/sexual assault on college campuses these days.

    1) meet a girl you are attracted to.

    2) after x amount of encounters, engage in consensual sex. Once, twice or even on more occasions without one instance of refusal or any sort of objection to what’s going down.

    3) receive texts from girl telling you how great a time she had and let’s do it again soon.

    4) receive texts from girl asking why you are avoiding her.

    5) girl now reconsiders and feels she’s been violated; receive summons from school disciplinary board with no right to counsel, ability to confront the accuser or any sort of due process.

    6) be summarily kicked out of school.

    The Left wants this to be part of the new standards everywhere.

    harkin (7f4688)

  47. 43… allegations about an alleged incident from high school? What’s next, middle school?… it. is. to. laugh.

    If there was anything to this high school incident, the appropriate thing for the shameless Democrats to do would’ve been to put in on the table when received, unredacted.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  48. Some people are sneeringly labeled “NeverTrump” because they have the nerve to ask that consistent standards of judgment be applied, with no special exemptions for Donald Trump, or his allies.

    That’s what so many miss IMO, the Trump supporters have not seen consistent standards applied in decades.

    harkin (7f4688)

  49. The invisible victim should man up and testify under oath.
    And Chinese Finestein is one horrible hack.

    mg (8cbc69)

  50. @28. ‘Rolling disclosure;’… nobody plays just one game of ‘bingo.’ Why make a story into a two-day affair when you can tease it out. Ask O’Reilly, Moonves, Weinstein, Franken, Rose, Lauer, etc.,

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  51. @5. Plenty of women ‘vouched’ for Moonves’ character, too. Until CBS cancelled him.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  52. @38. Yeah, but the times are changing before our eyes. We all knew in Hollywood the buzz on Weinstein for years; it was a ‘work-around.’ And back in the day at CBS, the ‘old boy’s network’ at the network was entrenched and well known along the corridors at Black Rock and particularly up at CBS News at W. 57th., – just ask Leslie Stahl. What passes for ‘acceptable conduct’ is in flux and long-past behavior is being held accountable. as they sat, ‘what goes around comes around.’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  53. “I’m old enough to remember when even rape victims in cases that went to trial had their names published in the newspapers, which is a different but related issue. Then, in the 1970s, the movement to pass rape shield laws came to fruition with the passage of a host of such laws by the 1980s. These laws protected alleged rape victims in trials from having their own sexual history dragged out and used against them except in limited circumstances.

    However, when these laws tried to make it a violation for newspapers to publish the names of victims, they ran afoul of the courts who mostly considered such laws unconstitutional. However, to this day, newspapers are reluctant to publish such information, as a courtesy, although they sometimes do. Of course, the scandal sheets and internet sites are not so reluctant, if they can manage to find out the information.

    But all of that is about legal proceedings and rape or sexual assault that meets the criteria for court proceedings. The accusations against Kavanaugh very clearly do not. So why is Feinstein protecting the accuser’s identity?

    Because PC practice now dictates it, as a mark of great sensitivity. That’s pernicious, because it elevates anonymous gossip to the status of news. Not only is the accused unable to confront the accuser, but the public is unable to evaluate a single thing connected with the incident. That leaves the space wide open for people to project whatever they wish onto the story, and politics rush in to fill gap.

    That’s Feinstein’s intent, of course. And everyone—right or left, man or woman, Democrat or Republican—should be calling her out for it. But of course they are not.

    But this isn’t just a case of someone publicizing this story. This is the case of a United States senator of great seniority (in every sense of the word) using anonymous gossip as character assassination for political purposes.

    Or trying to use it; we’ll see if it has any effect. So far it doesn’t seem to have derailed anything. But as I wrote yesterday, that’s probably not her intent. Her intent was to delay the hearings if possible (that doesn’t seem to be happening), or at the very least to taint Kavanaugh’s reputation forever and to rally Democrats to even greater fury for the 2018 elections.

    But there’s even more behind it. It’s a warning to any future appointee of Trump’s, just as the Manafort and Cohen and Flynn prosecutions are warnings to anyone who might associate with him in business or government: beware!! It’s scorched earth, and we will use every method we can think of to destroy you.”

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2018/09/15/why-everyone-should-be-angry-at-what-feinstein-did-re-kavanaugh-and-why-everyone-is-not/

    harkin (7f4688)

  54. “They can’t stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation but they can certainly try to delegitimize him, whether to call his decisions on the Court into question among liberals or to goose turnout for their party this fall or both. The sensational detail about referring the matter to the FBI is a master stroke of ratf*cking: No matter where this goes now, even if it completely disappears off the national radar screen, it’ll pass into progressive lore that Kavanaugh is some sort of sex criminal who not only doesn’t deserve to be on the bench but should actually be doing time somewhere…”

    All of this open defeatist handwringing and morose admiration of your enemies and all you had to do was say “Keith Ellison and Bill Clinton got away with it without even a smidgen of an investigation, guess those are the new rules, so eat it, losers!.”

    Things only ‘disappear off the national radar screen’ if you LET them disappear!

    For some odd reason Congressional Republicans are going to let them waste valuable media time on this rather than showing real governing strength by shutting it down, calling the vote, censuring Feinstein, and moving on to other things, no wonder their passive, indecisive selves are facing down a nasty election fight without Trump on the ballot to motivate swing voters.

    Nonpartisan Actor (3074c8)

  55. Dylan Matthews

    @dylanmatt
    I honestly don’t know what’s in it for Republicans in continuing to back Kavanaugh.

    He withdraws, Trump appoints Kethledge, Hardiman, or Coney Barrett instead, and they confirm in the lame duck anyway. Plus that way they don’t smear a sexual assault accuser.

    [this is Vox remember]
    __ _

    “What’s “in it for Republicans?” You mean other than refusing to establish a precedent by which any nominee for anything can be vetoed by vague, anonymous, half-peddled, whisper-driven accusations? If Kavanaugh withdraws now, while the charge against him remains glued to the shadows, he ensures that nobody in politics will ever again need to flesh out their accusations, and all but guarantees that the minority party in the Senate will be able to kill any figure at any time on the basis of nothing more than innuendo. I can certainly see why that would appeal to Matthews: It would hand him a magic wand with which to eliminate from public life anyone he so much as disdains. But for “Republicans” — and, indeed, for America — it would be suicidal, not to mention deeply, deeply unjust.

    It would be suicidal because it would ensure that eleventh-hour efforts would be marshaled against every qualified nominee from now until the end of time. It would be unjust because it would ensure that innocent people would be railroaded and, in time, that good people stayed well clear of politics lest their names be unfairly sullied (note that ThinkProgres has already laundered “we have a letter” into “Kavanaugh is a rapist”). As usual, Vox and its fellow travelers seem unaware that there are two sides to this equation, not just one. It would, of course, be terrible if Kavanaugh’s accuser was telling the truth and she wasn’t believed. But it would also be terrible — and just as terrible — if Kavanaugh were falsely accused, and if that false accusation stuck. One of the many, many problems with the insistence that we must always reflexively believe the accuser is that it fails to take account of this fact.

    Naturally, Republicans should refuse to be sucked into such an immoral arrangement. If there is a case here, it should be publicly aired, publicly examined, and publicly debated. While there is not, the answer to any would-be short-circuiters must be “no, no, no, no, no,” for any other path will lead us down the path to superstition, to caprice, and, ultimately, to the habitual presumption of guilt. And the long-term losers from that transformation will look a lot different than Judge Kavanaugh.”

    harkin (7f4688)

  56. There is the possibility that the name will be leaked right before the vote takes place…as planned all along. And if so, and if Kavanagh is not confirmed, the left still won’t get Merrick Garland.

    Dana (023079)

  57. Time for Gloria Allred and her attorney flare!

    mg (8cbc69)

  58. Speaking of staff sitting behind the main guy, making hand signals, this fella’s casual OK sign looked deliberate, and the Coast Guard “removed him from the response”.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  59. the Coast Guard’s been morphing into a pussyhat ladies’ auxiliary for quite awhile now

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  60. This is the same Democrat Party that added Ms. Salazar to its ranks. The upset by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez made a kind of sense, but voters should have steered clear of Ms. Salazar. Sure, they're both young, female, socialist, telegenic and hispanic, but Ms. Salazar is a prolific liar.

    A few weeks ago, Ms. Salazar was perfectly positioned as the Robin to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Batman. She was a Colombian immigrant with a Columbia degree. A Jew of color and a working-class girl raised by a single mother without a college degree who had struggled to support her family. She was treated to flattering profiles in outlets like The Village Voice and New York Magazine.
    The problem is that few of the details were true.

    And the tribalism on the Left smells a little familiar.

    No matter how many things Ms. Salazar makes up, it seems unfair to liken her to our post-truth president, who lies on a much grander scale and who has the power to do far, far greater damage.
    And yet, the willingness of Ms. Salazar’s supporters to look past her fabrications sounds eerily familiar to the justifications Trump supporters made in 2016: Yes, he’s distasteful and prone to exaggeration. But he’s promising to pass policies we like. Supporting him is a price worth paying in pursuit of our goals.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  61. Mr. French expressed it well:

    I agree with Charlie’s post below. What Dianne Feinstein has done to Brett Kavanaugh is unconscionable. She sat on a vague, anonymous accusation for months, refused to question Kavanaugh about it, refused to demand further substantiation, and then actually had the audacity to publicly refer it to law enforcement without providing a single shred of evidence that the referral was warranted. This is character assassination on a grand scale.
    But it’s getting worse. Kavanaugh has unequivocally and unambiguously denied the claim, and there’s so far zero evidence supporting the accusation. So, how do you continue to smear the man? Easy. Turn even his good character against him. Now it’s somehow suspicious that he was able to quickly amass the signatures of dozens of women to vouch for his character.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  62. @62. What Feinstein did is “unconscionable?” Mr. French suffers from premature accusation; perhaps it’s what Kavanaugh did that is “unconscionable” – and as ‘rolling disclosure’ rolls on, the name is out this AM in a piece in WaPo: Christine Blasey Ford. The GOP has a grenade to jump on.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  63. Told you this would become standard operating procedure after some conservatives let the left’s smears tank Roy Moore.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  64. And now we find out she’s a lefty professor who “recovered” these memories in therapy. Oh, the therapist wrote down that she said it was 4 guys who attack her, but she said the therapist was wrong and wrote the wrong number.

    Gotta love it. No shame.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  65. A link:

    Christine Blasey Ford is going public with her allegations against Kavanaugh

    DRJ (15874d)

  66. @66. WaPo published the story; ‘rolling disclosure’ rolls on into the week…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  67. Yes, DCSCA, the Daily Mail links to a story in the Washington Post but there are limits on how many Post stories a person can read each month. There aren’t for the Daily Mail and it links the Post article for anyone who wants to read it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  68. They only need the storyline to peak on Thursday for the Kavanaugh vote.

    DRJ (15874d)

  69. Repeating myself from the other thread, DRJ…

    The sexual harassment business with Kavanaugh is heating up. And, similar to my statements above, it is so depressing to see folks lining up in support of the accuser, when those very same people were silent when the topic was William Jefferson Clinton.

    So much of our energy is being used to fuel partisanship. It’s sad.

    Simon Jester (e5f6ee)

  70. @70. Times have changed; ask Les Moonves.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  71. Everything is a weapon, even the weather.

    Narciso (8c497a)

  72. Let’s see if reporters ask for and she provides details about where and when this happened, and thus whether her story stands up to scrutiny.

    DRJ (15874d)

  73. Yes, DCSCA, the Daily Mail links to a story in the Washington Post but there are limits on how many Post stories a person can read each month.

    Use your browser’s “anonymous” or “privacy mode” feature.

    These sorts of limits are nearly always enforced using cookies, which you can refuse to accept.

    Dave (445e97)

  74. Recovering memory in therapy is a real thing, NJRob — or at least, reconnecting with things that you’ve pushed out of your mind and not dealt with. In a lot of ways, that’s the essence of therapy.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  75. Thanks, Dave, good advice. I still try to avoid links to places like Politico, the Post and the Times if I can. Old habit but I’m old.

    DRJ (15874d)

  76. I read them but I don’t like to link them. It’s probably futile but I feel better.

    DRJ (15874d)

  77. Christine Blasey Ford is going public with her allegations against Kavanaugh

    I read the DDID piece. It still doesn’t excuse what Feinstein did. Ms. Ford sounds sincere in her recounting of what happened but, absent additional information (including other charges of abuse), I don’t think it should be enough to kibosh his confirmation.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  78. Aphrael,

    it’s also a good way to conjure false memories. Or just pull a Rolling Stone with a made up Mr. Monahan.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  79. Christine needs to start carrying around a mattress so people take her seriously

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  80. Now that is funny.

    DRJ (15874d)

  81. Let’s see if reporters ask for and she provides details about where and when this happened, and thus whether her story stands up to scrutiny.

    She admits not remembering some details:

    After so many years, Ford said she does not remember some key details of the incident. She said she believes it occurred in the summer of 1982, when she was 15, around the end of her sophomore year at the all-girls Holton-Arms School in Bethesda. Kavanaugh would have been 17 at the end of his junior year at Georgetown Prep.

    At the time, Ford said, she knew Kavanaugh and Judge as “friendly acquaintances” in the private-school social circles of suburban Maryland. Her Holton-Arms friends mostly hung out with boys from the Landon School, she said, but for a period of several months socialized regularly with students from Georgetown Prep.

    Ford said she does not remember how the gathering came together the night of the incident. She said she often spent time in the summer at the Columbia Country Club pool in Chevy Chase, where in those pre-cellphone days, teenagers learned about gatherings via word of mouth. She also doesn’t recall who owned the house or how she got there.

    Ford said she remembers that it was in Montgomery County, not far from the country club, and that no parents were home at the time. Ford named two other teenagers who she said were at the party. Those individuals did not respond to messages on Sunday morning.

    The article claims she passed a polygraph test.

    My current take: I wouldn’t rule out the possibility she is telling the truth. But without some independent corroboration, it is too long ago and too uncertain to disqualify Kavanaugh. Even if he admitted to it and apologized, it wouldn’t reflect well on him, but I’m not sure it should disqualify him unless there is evidence that he continued to behave the same way into adulthood.

    Dave (445e97)

  82. Kavanaugh’s getting Roy Moored good and hard

    he’ll always be an attempted raper now, and I doubt the parents of those young girls he likes to hang out with are gonna be super-thrilled to have him around any more

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  83. oops *anymore* i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  84. @82. ‘… it’s too long ago…”

    That would be news to Les Moonves.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  85. That would be news to Les Moonves.

    In his case, as appears to be typical for these types of offenders, there was a pattern of conduct extending over decades.

    Moonves was not taken down by a single incident 36 years ago.

    Dave (445e97)

  86. Kavanaugh’s getting Roy Moored good and hard

    Um, no. Moore was a 30-something serial chaser of minor-aged girls, not to mention a judge who twice flouted the rule of law that resulted in him getting kicked off the bench. Kavanaugh was a s**t-faced minor who may have done something stupid, perhaps illegal.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  87. @86. It’s only Sunday; ‘rolling disclosure’ rolls on… And 80’s encounter[s] were part of Moonves’ demise in 2018.

    Kavanaugh’s been ‘marketed’ as squeaky clean; so this is what happens when you sell the sizzle and not the steak. McConnell may end up being correct about him after all.

    There are plenty of conservatives on that ‘list’ to select from and one is going to get the gig regardless of Kavanaugh’s fate- unless the show gets stalled past the midterms and the GOP loses the Senate.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  88. The “this is not Roy Moore” contortions are getting fun to watch.

    Munroe (35a803)

  89. It’s like a game of twister, after a,few beers.

    Narciso (181de5)

  90. so we should talk about summer salads cause shrimps are on sale

    here’s my go-to super simple one, but it’s not for everybody cause it’s built around resistant starch, which is something you have to get used to eating – the first couple times can be kind of an experience

    so here’s what you want to do get the frozen shrimps in the bag

    (for this salad you can use frozen shrimps … this is not an endorsement of frozen shrimp)

    i always get the large ones cause they’re more flexible … but for this salad you’ll chop em up

    the rest of the ingredients is listed here in this list:

    2 cups rice

    one stalk celeries

    one eighth or so of a large onion

    dressing (details below)

    tomatoes – canned or fresh is fine but you won’t use a whole can so whatever works … i used the canned kind with olive oil and the garlic and basil already in there – we’ll talk more about that in a minute here

    garlic powder

    salt

    and… that’s it

    ok so however you make your rice, go ahead and add the garlic powder and tomatoes – i use about two heaping tablespoons of the canned olive oil garlic basil tomatoes … the food scientist people what have studied resistant starch say if you cook your rice with a teaspoon of oil you’ll end up with more and better grams of resistant starch … but I’m not wild about adding oil, so instead of adding oil I add the tomatoes with oil as kind of a compromise

    while the rice is cooking chop up the celery and onion … i use a chipper-chopper for this the kind you slam bam bam bam

    chop up your shrimps

    ok when the rice is done dump it in a mixing bowl and add the celery and onion and shrimp

    mix mix mix outside in outside in

    ok so now you have to refrigerate overnight – this is when some amount of the starch becomes resistant (meaning it doesn’t get digested) … how much converts depends on the variety of rice and other factors

    some say you should bake the rice after it cooks to dry it a bit and that this will aid in the formation of more resistant starch, but life is a wee little bit too short for that nonsense

    ok so i dress this when i serve it

    you can use a sparing amount of balsamic for each bowl, mix it up, and call it done

    OR you can do the same thing with apple cider vinegar – I just measure out say 5 ounces of vinegar and ad four teaspoons of sugar and shake shake shake

    then add this sparingly to a bowl when you plate it (seriously think maybe a teaspoon of dressing per bowl

    then you add salt to taste and bam you’re done

    sometimes instead of celery and onions i use blueberries and sliced strawberries

    ok that’s your easy breezy summer salad

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  91. oh also if i use the berries i season with basil instead of garlic

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  92. The woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault came forward with her explosive allegations on Sunday, saying the supposed attack “derailed me substantially for four or five years” and claiming that the episode rendered her “unable to have healthy relationships with men.”

    how can you not snicker at this

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  93. However, Ford told The Post she did not recall exactly who owned the house, how she came to be at the house, or how the gathering was arranged. She remembered only that the house was in Montgomery County, near a country club, and that parents were not present.

    wow she just oozes the credibility doesn’t she

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  94. wow she just oozes the credibility doesn’t she

    Admitting what you don’t know or aren’t sure of, rather than making it up, generally improves one’s credibility.

    Dave (445e97)

  95. oops i forgot to close my parens after “a teaspoon of dressing per bowl”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  96. no Dave when you leave out any detail what would enable someone to verify your story it means you’re a lying faker indulging in lurid rape fantasies

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  97. Maybe her department has amnesia:

    https://profiles.stanford.edu/christine-blasey

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  98. @93. ‘how can you not snicker at this’

    Damn, Mr. Feet; if working on the Mars candy account at an agency, would steal that line for print and TV ads through Halloween.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  99. ooh good call

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  100. Although those commercials with the yawning, what up with that?

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  101. 93: it’s really easy not to snicker at it. taking years to recover and being haunted by events in a way that interferes with your ability ot form other relationships is very common for trauma.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  102. i don’t agree i think she’s a lying nutcase and a very pedestrian cliched one at that

    did you catch how she’s sure to clarify she was wearing a “one-piece bathing suit” lol

    she wasn’t one of those two-piece girls, you see

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  103. yup she can remember what she was wearing but she has no idea whose house she was at

    yeah she’s not a lying rape fantasist she’s super-credible

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  104. We live in a post truth world, where cities go to the torch because of a lie, the al dura libel against Israel,

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  105. Grassley’s response was actually a non-response, but I believe him when he says the committee is going to vote on Kavanaugh this week, which I take to mean that the rest of the GOP in the Senate will vote to confirm him.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  106. We should remind the Left that, even if what Kavanaugh allegedly did was true, the Dems should still vote to confirm him because of the One Free Grope Rule, a rule that liberal feminist Steinem established when a serial sexual abuser was president. To do otherwise would be hypocritical.

    Some feminists have begun making excuses for the president that could hurt working women. Feminist Steinem wrote a piece in Sunday’s New York Times, in which she said she believed all the women’s accusations against Clinton “for the sake of argument.” Willey has claimed the president fondled her breast and placed her hand on his crotch. Nonetheless, Steinem wrote that Clinton “took ‘no’ for an answer.” Brutes have cause to rejoice: Feminists have concocted a One Free Grope defense.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  107. These responses were years ago:

    http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1352705

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  108. @108. Times change. It’s 2018. Not 1998, when Playboy still published monthly. They’re going quarterly in 2019, down from their current six-issues-a-year.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  109. They scrubbed most of her bio, but her high school alumni page has traces

    https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/christine-ford-politics-republican-democrat-blasey/

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  110. A bedroom that allows the occupant to be locked inside seems kind of odd.

    Dave (226325)

  111. they keep calling this an allegation about something that happened 30 years ago but she would have been 21 then

    and she’s been a basketcase ever since

    low self esteem eats too much candy

    in her mind she’s STILL trapped in that bedroom

    trapped like an animal

    need more candy need more candy

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  112. 95… #IdontbelieveHer

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  113. I need more to understand why she is sure this was Kavanaugh she remembers. They went to different schools and hung out in groups during one summer. That’s vague for someone who admits she isn’t sure where or when this happened, and who also admits she didn’t tell anyone about it for 20 or 25 years.

    DRJ (15874d)

  114. “A bedroom that allows the occupant to be locked inside seems kind of odd.”

    It’s fairly common in single family homes, especially master bedrooms.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  115. I thought she said she locked herself in the bathroom.

    DRJ (15874d)

  116. he look-a like-a man

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  117. @106. Nothing ‘Pop’ Corn says today has much of a shelf life; this story is moving faster than the hour hand on his pocket watch.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  118. Kavanaugh got attention for dissenting in an ObamaCare case in November 2011. She is in the health care field and cares enough about health care to join an ACLU letter about the Trump immigration action’s impact on children.

    She says she first went went public in 2012 with this story with a therapist. Anyone know what month in 2012 that was?

    DRJ (15874d)

  119. If Mr. Kavanaugh *did* try to do some kind of NFL-style gang-rape on this nutty pickle then why’s he denying it ever happened?

    He’s not even trying to make up an excuse – he just says nope never happened.

    That’s pretty compelling testimony, and what it does is, it puts the burden of proof on the nutcase lady.

    I don’t think she thought this through.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  120. #the12thofNever

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  121. interesting how the nutcase rape fantasy lady did NOT make the top of Drudge

    she’s just filed under “random lame crap what happened on a sunday”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  122. Ford’s lawyer told the Post that Ford’s story passed a polygraph test administered last month by a former FBI agent.

    so is this yet another Putin-style hit orchestrated by the sleazy corrupt FBI

    sure stinks like it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  123. I think her husband, Ford, said she used Kavanaugh’s name in 2012 couples therapy. It sounds like this was the first time she mentioned the incident or Kavanaugh’s name to her husband. That’s a long time to remember a name from high school, but maybe it was a traumatic event. It’s surprising she waited so long to tell anyone but I guess it happens. November 2011-sometime in 2012 is much closer in time to remember a name from your past, especially since Kavanaugh’s prep school education is (and probably was in 2012) part of his DC Court bio.

    DRJ (15874d)

  124. I think there are friendly polygraphers. Where’s nk? He knows.

    DRJ (15874d)

  125. he didn’t sign her yearbook though

    rapers ALWAYS sign the yearbook

    duh

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  126. Different schools. Normally people sign yearbooks for their own schools. But maybe it’s different there. I am not from the Northeast and don’t know their traditions.

    DRJ (15874d)

  127. all I know is the rapist code of honor dictates that you sign the yearbook

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  128. it should be noted as well how even though Mr. Kavanaugh is a federalist society conservative and the nutcase lady is a hot-to-trot political donor to Bernie Sanders and socialism, they were able to put these differences aside while Mr. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her 35 years ago

    that’s really remarkable

    but that was a different era

    people were more genteel back then

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  129. that’s really remarkable

    Ever hear of “beer goggles,” footsies?

    Dave (445e97)

  130. Do you really want to act like you know a lot about rapists?

    DRJ (15874d)

  131. Back in my dorm, there were three classifications:

    Paper-bag ugly #1: so unattractive you’d put a paper bag over her head to avoid being seen in public

    Paper-bag ugly #2: so unattractive you’d put a paper bag over YOUR head to avoid being seen in public

    Coyote ugly: so unattractive that you’d chew your arm off at the joint to avoid waking her up on the way out the next morning

    Dave (445e97)

  132. Nice contribution Dave

    steveg (a9dcab)

  133. 5 alarm fire, call 911.

    mg (8cbc69)

  134. i’ve learned a lot about rape from nevertrump this past year

    pickle pickle whose got the pickle

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  135. Is anyone really surprised this is the playbook now. It’s the seriousness of the charge that counts, not evidence of the act. And this is all to delay the vote to after the midterms to low the leftist dlSeators to avoid a difficult vote.

    NJRob (36a16f)

  136. Back when I was in high school guys would talk like that. It was all about looks and ummmm expressiveness.
    But some of my best female friends went through the hell of being homely, plain and shy and those words made me want to punch the people who were being so cruel to these great women who would love to be in a situation where they could keep their man happy. It took a while but they are all married now to guys who had no idea how great these “paper bag” women were gonna be.

    My wife is beautiful and she takes care of me like I’m a king. My friends treat their man the same. I love how my wife looks, but the way she takes care of our kids, our home, me, is where its really at.

    And by the way, I believe the woman who came out about Kavanaugh had something happen to her that the guys had no idea about. Drunk kids do drunk kid stuff. If he was a rapist, there’d be more accusers. My guess is they have Moore, I meant more, out there

    steveg (a9dcab)

  137. Mitt Romney says if it rapes like a duck and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and it like to hang out with sweaty young girls it’s probably his harvard pal Brett Kavanaugh:

    Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not Supreme Court nominees. I believe Christine Blasey Ford. Her account is too serious to ignore. Brett Kavanaugh is unfit for office and should step aside.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  138. oops *likes* to hang out with sweaty young girls i mean (typo)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  139. You have said this twice about Romney but I can’t find anything to substantiate it, hf. Link or admit you are lying.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  140. “Rolling disclosure” rolls on; CNN is in possession of letter from Ford to Feinstein and has read it on air w/names redacted. It is articulate, explicit and disturbingly descriptive.

    ‘Pop’ Corn best wind that pocket watch, get smart, postpone the vote for a week and have this aired all out in open or closed session under oath.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  141. that’s his exact quote he did on Roy Moore!

    i just updated it for him as a favor cause he’s not allowed to tweet on Sundays because Mormon Jesus

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  142. The Judge search teams of boooooosh and Trump look like nincompoops.

    mg (8cbc69)

  143. If drunk Ted’s Olds Delmont 88 would have had todays on-star technology, Mary-Jo may still be alive.

    mg (8cbc69)

  144. DRJ 141—you know my opinion. I think the boy can’t help it. If Patterico thinks it is okay, that’s just how it is. My best prediction is that the person in question will not be able to help himself, and keep amping up to his prior level of offensiveness, until he gets slapped around. My guess is that he has infinite energy for the profane and small.

    I have no solution. A great comments section is based on people with shared values with regard to commentary. This may be the New Normal.

    Simon Jester (4357eb)

  145. Where can I get a # me-too t-shirt?

    mg (8cbc69)

  146. Polygraph tests do not meet the scientific standard for admission into evidence. They don’t even rise to the level of “junk science”. The machine is really a prop, to fool both the person being interviewed and the public. The interviewer makes a subjective judgment on truth or falsity. A guess.

    nk (dbc370)

  147. evidence-wise polygraphs are kinda like how the sleazy fbi never records interviews

    they just mean whatever the sleazy men and women of the corrupt and perverted fbi say they mean

    this is what justice looks like in america in anymore

    FBI putin-style justice

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  148. in

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  149. Flake opposes quick vote on Kavanaugh, putting confirmation in doubt — UPDATE: — Sen. Jeff Flake, a member of the Senate Judiciary Commit

    lol cowardpig McCain’s little boyfriend’s gonna Roy Moore our boy Brett good and hard

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  150. Mitt Romney did say that about Roy Moore. But what do you expect from a guy who killed Ann Dunham (Obama’s mom) by taking away her health insurance when she was dying of cancer; did not pay any taxes until 2012 when he was shamed into it by Harry Reid; and keeps women in binders. “Binders and binders of women”!

    nk (dbc370)

  151. He should have stayed as the antelope whisperer in Botswana or wherever.

    narciso (d1f714)

  152. They measure physiological changes that happen under stress, but aldrich ames passed a number of them,

    narciso (d1f714)

  153. Lol
    The gop gave up on getting rid of obamacare. Lol. Now they will cave on Kavanaugh. Lol.
    Why would anyone vote for republican fence straddlers? Still lol.

    mg (8cbc69)

  154. nevertrump’s the gift that keeps on giving

    my favorite is when they pretend to give a tinker’s damn about the poor iddle biddle wiggly giggly fetuses

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  155. Kavanaugh should hire Mizz Gloria.

    mg (8cbc69)

  156. There’s also that the lady is a mental patient. If she believes that it actually happened (like the one in Florida who thinks she was abducted by aliens), then she will come across as credible. Even if she does not come across for other things, heh-heh-heh.

    nk (dbc370)

  157. Its the constanza rule, why would the university delete her whole profile?

    narciso (d1f714)

  158. Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake and all their nevertrump friends really did pave the way for the comeuppance of sex assault perpetrator and coach of young sweaty girls Brett Kavanaugh

    they created the perfect roadmap

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  159. Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions!

    that’s quite the noose Mitt Romney slipped around your neck there Brett

    i hear you poop yourself after they pull the lever is that your understanding as well

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  160. Nice contribution Dave

    Yeah, you’re right – it was tasteless and dumb.

    I apologize.

    Dave (445e97)

  161. You left out or misdescribed “double-bagger”. (It’s actually a term.) A paper bag for her and a paper bag for you, in case her bag breaks.

    nk (dbc370)

  162. Talk about going out on a limb:

    Stelter: Trump will likely take Kavanaugh’s side

    CNN’s Brian Stelter thinks President Donald Trump will side with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after a woman came forward to accuse Kavanaugh of committing sexual assault in the 1980s.

    Dave (445e97)

  163. Jeff Flake is one of those guys who wants Trump to fail even if it hurts America. There were guys like that when Obama was around too. Remember Edward Snowden? Romney is just a ball-less burnout. His heyday was as a lackey for Bain’s board of directors and that was a long time ago.

    nk (dbc370)

  164. mittens is a 4 state grifter

    mg (8cbc69)

  165. Flake and the uni-party rinos putting it to the deplorables, oh my!
    What comes after deplorable?

    mg (8cbc69)

  166. Jeff Flake is one of those guys who wants Trump to fail even if it hurts America.

    I disagree.

    He wants Trump to fail at certain things, just like we wanted Obama to fail at things we knew would be harmful to the country.

    Flake wants Trump to fail at turning America into a place where it’s OK for someone like Donald Trump to be president.

    Anyone who cares about morality and conservatism, and loves America, should be with Flake.

    Dave (445e97)

  167. I can see Grassley delaying the vote a day or two, but it gets more protracted, Feinstein and her dirty tricks win. Guy Benson’s tweets make sense.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  168. Ah! Flake is a Mormon, too. That explains it. Mormons are a matriarchy to beat all matriarchies and the men are afraid to fart in case they offend a woman somewhere.

    nk (dbc370)

  169. The article claims she passed a polygraph test.

    Polygraphs, to the extent that they are accurate, will tell you that someone is being deceptive, not whether the person is remembering correctly. Even if the event never happened, if the woman honestly believes it did, she would pass a poly.

    Ford may really believe this happened. But the only thing she seems to be sure of is Kavanaugh did it. She has no idea when or where this happened.

    My take: it’s not she said/he said. It’s she said/they said. Both Kavanaugh and Judge deny it happened. Judge has no reason to lie: he’s painted as a hero in Ford’s story, stopping the would-be attack.

    Chuck Bartowski (211c17)

  170. Thanks for the link, Paul. I agree with Benson. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, and I hope he is if nothing else comes out than what we’ve seen, his new best friend on the Court may be Clarence Thomas instead of John Roberts. I don’t think that will please the Democrats.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  171. Exactly, Chuck. Good comment.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  172. Flake may not vote Kavannagh out of committee..

    reff (654c04)

  173. Shapiro makes sense, too.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  174. Dave, of course Trump will take Kav’s side – he’s the “cool kid” version of Ted Cruz.

    urbanleftbehind (3e4f3e)

  175. so now Brett needs to do a polygraph about whether he tried to rape crazypickles

    i think the sleazy corrupt FBI should administer it cause everybody trusts them

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  176. plus we can ask the girls on his team whether his rape style matches the testimony of this crazy Bernie Sanders lady

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  177. This story smacks of the reports two decades or so ago where people were dredging – false, in most cases – memories of being abused by parents, teachers, etc. and most were the result of psychotherapy sessions, some of which ended up in court. All of that kind of thing ended and it was like it never happened. One particularly egregious case was in the Bakersfield, Ca. area.

    Colonel Haiku (7f045b)

  178. @171. ‘She has no idea when or where this happened.’

    Inaccurate. The letter she sent to Feinstein, which CNN has obtained and read on air w/appropriate redactions, is articulate, descripting and explicit. The ‘judge’ has every reason to lie and reason to believe he can get away w/it; he’d be a shoe-in if up for parish priest or cardinal.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  179. I smell a rat.

    Colonel Haiku (7f045b)

  180. Judge has no reason to lie: he’s painted as a hero in Ford’s story, stopping the would-be attack.

    I don’t want to mischaracterize your position, but are you suggesting that his lifelong friendship with Kavanaugh, and the fact that anything other than a flat-out denial would cost his friend a seat on the Supreme Court, do not constitute a reason to lie (if the denial cannot be made truthfully)?

    I am a bit surprised that both guys made such unconditional denials. I could not say, with absolute 100% certainty, that I never did what Kavanaugh is accused of. I have no recollection of it, and nobody has ever suggested that I did, but I cannot honestly claim to remember everything I did while intoxicated 35 years ago. Any suggestion that I could is frankly preposterous.

    Dave (445e97)

  181. @182. =Haikhrushchev= Gesundheit!

    Then shower, Helstinki.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  182. I agree with Shapiro. Call for a vote.

    Colonel Haiku (7f045b)

  183. This is why I an glad there s a new montslbano instead of this rejected spec script from scandal season 1.

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  184. How can he prove a negative, Dr. Dave pretorious

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  185. Now that you mention it, Dave, were you ever in Nacogdoches?

    nk (dbc370)

  186. Call for a vote.

    And pray for Kavanaugh and his family, and for this country under siege.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  187. Kennedy can’t count: he believes Feinstein has had this letter about ‘three months.’ It’s more like roughly eight weeks.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  188. So she s a doc Brown supporter, all the bug nutz crazy ones are, take the other broke girl and the identity stealing woke Colombian gal

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  189. Thanks for the information about where to find a copy of Ford’s letter, DCSCA. Here is the redacted letter. She does not state a specific date or location.

    DRJ (15874d)

  190. But after reading it, she portrays Judge more like a perpetrator than a saviour.

    DRJ (15874d)

  191. Now that you mention it, Dave, were you ever in Nacogdoches?

    I don’t believe I’ve ever been east of the 100th meridian in Texas…

    Dave (445e97)

  192. @192. Her school in Maryland issued a statement of support as well.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  193. Somewhere, somehow, someone must have kicked you around some
    Who knows, maybe you were tied up, taken away, and held for ransom
    Baby, it don’t make no difference to me
    Make up any kind of sh!t
    I’m saying just say anything that will make Kavanaugh lose the seat

    nk (dbc370)

  194. Wait doesn’t this sound like the gotcha against admiral Jackson, the particulars are different.

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  195. @192. DRJ, she states in the letter it was at a gathering in a suburban Maryland home. We know where Kavanaugh attended school and Ford’s Maryland school has issued a statement of support. Guess she was remiss in not mentioning if they’d been serving and drinking Pabst or Budweiser. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  196. Ryan Saavedra 🇺🇸 on Twitter: “Debra Katz, the lawyer representing Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford, defended Al Franken when he was accused of sexual misconduct, saying, “He did not do this as a member of the U.S. Senate.” https://t.co/nliQyUi
    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10215038242341554&id=1595044785

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  197. #DemocratSmearMachine

    nk (dbc370)

  198. the question Senator Flake needs to ask him is did he get all this rape business out of his system or does he still struggle with urges to rape high school girls

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  199. The peculiar aspect to this is the knee-jerk ideological conservative reaction as well as the old farts outgassing on the committee– as if they’d bought into the marketing sizzle not caring that the steak is too tough to chew. Do you want a properly vetted conservative in the spot or specifically Kavanaugh; because McConnell may end up having been correct about this fella. There’s a long list of other conservative candidates to pluck just as qualified. Why ‘go to the mattresses’ so-to-speak, w/this guy, especially if there’s a lurker like this; because unless the Senate flips in the midterms, a conservative will get the slot.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  200. From Nacogdoches to New Orleans
    In beat up, old cars
    Never limousines

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  201. Well he’s been a guest of the castro regime, and all that entails,

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  202. I want Kavanaugh as a Justice and want to put an end to these low-brow Borking-Thomas machinations.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  203. The peculiar aspect to this is the knee-jerk ideological conservative reaction as well as the old farts outgassing on the committee…
    I don’t think it’s “knee-jerk” to conclude that, if that’s all there is with Kavanaugh, then he should be voted on in committee this week and confirmed by the Senate later this month. There is some serious power politics going on here and it transcends whether or not a nominee assaulted a girl when he was a s**t-faced minor. Not only should Feinstein’s dirty tricks not be rewarded by delaying a vote, same goes with “Spartacus” Booker and Kamala Harris for their bulls**t. If the GOP lets that door open, then the Dems will only just be empowered and enabled to replay this game with the next nominee. It needs to stop, and the way to stop it is basically say a big “f**k you” to Feinstein and the rest of the Dems for doing this. This isn’t tribal because I’m not a Republican. This is about calling bulls**t on tactics that are little different from Clarence Thomas circa 1991.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  204. @201. Perhaps it’s unfair or just the way he comes cross on the TeeVee, but there’s something smarmy and secretive about him, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  205. @206. Keep in mind, ‘if that’s all there is’ is fairly significant in this day and age as Moonves, Cosby, Franken, Weinstein, Rose, Lauer, etc., on the ever growing list learned all too well.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  206. @206. And remember, the letter to Feinstein is dated July 30 and this story went public September 13 or there abouts– that’s six weeks or so– not ‘three months’ as Kennedy bloviated to Fox viewers. So the ‘big FU’ blusters is going both ways, Paul.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  207. Re your #191, Narciso…in Broke Girl canon, the accuser is Jennifer Coolidge without the over the top Polish immigrant cosplay.

    urbanleftbehind (3e4f3e)

  208. It’s one part st elmos fire, one part 16 candles,

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  209. And also shares the same social circles in the Balto -DC – Annapolis triangle where Sue Ellen Mischke took away a boy that Elaine Benes had a crush on.

    urbanleftbehind (3e4f3e)

  210. And, I need to correct and apologize for my post at #175, where I wrote “Flake.” I did not correct the mistake before posting. I did not mean to identify Jeff Blake in that way, but did mean to put his correct last name. Sorry.

    reff (654c04)

  211. Keep in mind, ‘if that’s all there is’ is fairly significant in this day…

    On that we agree, and it’s always good to qualify what you say when you don’t know the whole story, but he’s been vetted. If there was anything else, it should’ve and would’ve turned up. IMO, this was a hole card that Feinstein played, but it was just one card. Unlike Moore, who was a 30-something serial chaser of minor-aged girls, there’s no other indication Kavanaugh was untoward with the opposite sex. Also, three months v. eight weeks is not a serious offense; the main point is that Feinstein sat on the letter until the most politically opportune (or un-opportune) moment.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  212. By now you’ve all heard that Christine Blasey Ford is the woman accusing Kavanaugh of attacking her 35 years ago, a claim he strenuously and absolutely denies. Her story is a bizarre pastiche of precise details and huge memory holes. It’s also got a big lie planted right in the middle, which is Ford’s claim that she always meant to be private and only went public now because she couldn’t hide anymore.

    That’s bull crap. The moment Ford sent a letter to a Democrat pol, she knew with absolute certainty that this would be a big deal, that her name would emerge, and that she’d become the Democrats’ new darling.

    But this post is going to focus on one of the more weird things about Ford’s accusation against Kavanaugh, which is the fact her therapist’s notes date from 2012:

    Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room. (Emphasis mine.)

    Put aside for now the fact that the notes don’t jive with the accusations Ford is making. Focus, instead, on that date: 2012.

    It’s a weird date. Keep in mind that Ford, aside from being a Bernie supporting academic, is a psychologist. Part of getting a degree in psychology is going through analysis. One would think that, even if, as a shy 15-year-old, Ford was too afraid to go public with her charge against Kavanaugh, when she went through psychoanalysis on her way to her degree, she would have spoken about this alleged assault, especially because she says it traumatized her for years. But she didn’t. Instead, suddenly, in 2012, she’s bathed in flop sweat from an incident decades before.

    So what happened in 2012? Coincidentally (or not), 2012 was another election year.

    In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

    For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012:

    https://twitter.com/1776Stonewall/status/1041460253362188288

    I’ll save you a click to The New Yorker website. The article, which The New Yorker published in 2012, is a Jeffrey Toobin analysis about Bret Kavanaugh and the threat he would pose should he get on the Supreme Court. According to Toobin, Kavanaugh was a scary conservative who, if he got on the Court, might overturn Obamacare:

    In other words, according to Kavanaugh, even if the Supreme Court upholds the law this spring, a President Santorum, say, could refuse to enforce aca because he “deems” the law unconstitutional. That, to put the matter plainly, is not how it works. Courts, not Presidents, “deem” laws unconstitutional, or uphold them. “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,” Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in Marbury v. Madison, in 1803, and that observation, and that case, have served as bedrocks of American constitutional law ever since. Kavanaugh, in his decision, wasn’t interpreting the Constitution; he was pandering to the base.

    In the nineteen-nineties, during Kavanaugh’s first brush with prominence, it was said that some conservatives suffered from Clinton derangement syndrome—an obsessive belief that the President and the First Lady had committed every misdeed that was attributed to them. (Hillary Clinton was involved in Vince Foster’s death; Bill Clinton had trafficked narcotics through Mena, Arkansas; and so on.) Kavanaugh’s bizarre opinion confirms that a contemporary analogue to the Clinton malady has taken hold: health-care derangement syndrome.

    There’s more blah-blah from Toobin, a man who can never be trusted to be honest about the law. Don’t bother reading it. Just pay attention to that last paragraph:

    If a Republican, any Republican, wins in November, his most likely first nominee to the Supreme Court will be Brett Kavanaugh. (Emphasis mine.)

    In 2012, Romney might have won the election. In 2012, Toobin stoked Democrat fears that Kavanaugh, a conservative, might get on the Supreme Court and overturn Obamacare. And in 2012, Ford, a psychotherapist who undoubtedly had years of prior therapy herself, suddenly can’t stop talking about her hitherto undisclosed claim that Kavanaugh was a bad boy almost 30 years before.”

    https://bookwormroom.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=75ae2ab12d2fbdd86a007efa0&id=1e59470a97&e=d6d74b1f56

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  213. nk,
    I’ve been to Nacogdoches. Refereed at Sam Houston several times. Good place!

    reff (654c04)

  214. Missed a quote mark at the start of that…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  215. I dubbed him fideloflake, in an early era he would be boerflake

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  216. @214. ‘…he’s been vetted…’

    Apparently not fully. So what’s a week to delay, get F & K under oath and flush it out. See no problem w/this at all and neither should they nor the committee nor either side. After all, from a GOP POV, it doesn’t seem wise to steam roll over this and alienate any more independent women voters than necessary these days. But your argument that ‘there is some serious power politics going on here and it transcends whether or not a nominee assaulted a girl when he was a s**t-faced minor’ seems to rationalize the ends justifying the means. Suppose as a ‘s**t-faced minor,’ he’d robbed a 7-11; or shot a person on Fifth Avenue instead– that might qualify him to replace Pence as VP on the ticket in 2020.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  217. @214. And actually it’s three months vs. six weeks, not eight. It may not be a ‘serious offense’ to you but it is just a blatant lie to everyone else. Something we’d all like to get away from as we get enough tweeted at us daily as it is from you-know-who.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  218. How did she get her therapist’s notes? I thought that was a huge breach of ethics.

    And she teaches at one of those “schools” that only hand out psych degrees. Stanford it ain’t.

    Sounds fishy.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  219. Now rate my professor is perhaps not the most reliable source, one of my undergrad and one grad professor (one leans right, one,was pretty far left) have gotten like warn ratingd

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  220. How did she get her therapist’s notes? I thought that was a huge breach of ethics.

    Her therapist’s notes are part of her personal medical records.

    If she doesn’t have access to them, who should?

    Dave (445e97)

  221. In 2012, Romney might have won the election. In 2012, Toobin stoked Democrat fears that Kavanaugh, a conservative, might get on the Supreme Court and overturn Obamacare. And in 2012, Ford, a psychotherapist who undoubtedly had years of prior therapy herself, suddenly can’t stop talking about her hitherto undisclosed claim that Kavanaugh was a bad boy almost 30 years before.

    And so Ford did some research and discovered that – in an unimaginable stroke of luck – they had attended “elite” college prep schools in the same locality, and frequented the same country club as teens!

    Ford’s story may or may not be truthful, but the idea that a speculative article during the 2012 presidential campaign triggered a six-year conspiracy seems absurd.

    Dave (445e97)

  222. No Dave, a patient can be denied access to notes analyzing his condition, for instance, but not for records such as medications given.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  223. hippa rules prevent this, for good reasons

    Narciso (ad3ee4)

  224. No Dave, a patient can be denied access to notes analyzing his condition

    Even so, it’s a long way from “can be denied” to “must be denied”…

    According to this lengthy and authoritative-looking (it cites lots of relevant laws and regulations) list of answers:

    In America, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), patients are to be always allowed access to their entire and full medical record, with the exceptions as follows: Psychotherapy notes, which can be withheld if it is deemed to be in the patient’s best health interests […]

    So the charge that release of the therapist’s notes to the patient in this case was some kind of ethics violation is pretty silly.

    Dave (445e97)

  225. “Ford’s story may or may not be truthful, but the idea that a speculative article during the 2012 presidential campaign triggered a six-year conspiracy seems absurd.”

    Perhaps it would to a Democrat.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  226. They call that “playing the long con”.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  227. Perhaps it would to a Democrat.

    Ooh, Col. Haiku, that’s SO clever!

    I’m dying to find out whether this style of “insult by insinuation” is accepted under the new posting rules!

    Dave (445e97)

  228. sink sank sunk!

    lany (c63047)

  229. But your argument that ‘there is some serious power politics going on here and it transcends whether or not a nominee assaulted a girl when he was a s**t-faced minor’ seems to rationalize the ends justifying the means.

    No, because it’s really Feinstein who took an “ends justify the means” approach, and the Feinsteins of the world should not be rewarded for their tossing out political hand grenades like that. If she actually thought the letter was serious enough, she would’ve presented it to the committee at the appropriate time. As for your hypotheticals, I try to avoid them as much as possible.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  230. David French and the “more likely than not” standard, wit Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and Roy Moore on one side, and Kavanaugh on the “more not than likely” side.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  231. This should kill the Republican Party. Good riddance you cowardice hacks.

    mg (04bc41)

  232. Erick Erickson on the timing:

    Should the GOP decide to go down this road, they will need to ask the accuser under oath which Democrat firm has helped her. Because the timing of this story has all the characteristics of a well timed PR effort.
    The Washington Post just so happened to learn about this in July via the accuser calling a tip line.
    The accuser then reached out to Dianne Feinstein who held on to a letter until after the hearings had concluded and a vote was scheduled.
    Then the accuser came forward right before the vote and had helpfully had a polygraph done “by a former FBI agent” in early August.
    But the accuser said she did not want to come forward and wanted to be anonymous. But she helpfully reported herself to the media, lawyered up, and got a polygraph.
    This is all too perfect and has the makings for the perfect hit job.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  233. @192. DRJ, she states in the letter it was at a gathering in a suburban Maryland home.

    I read that but she does she remember which house it was? Some reports indicate she can’t remember exactly where and when it was.

    She said there were 5 people there including her. Blasey, Kavanaugh, Judge and 2 others. Who were the other 2? Maybe a boy and a girl, and maybe 1 lived there. Why can’t she remember more about a limited number of people on such a memorable night of her life?

    DRJ (15874d)

  234. We might be able to guess who else was at the party if we knew which home it was based on who owned the home then, but I don’t think she does.

    DRJ (15874d)

  235. If we knew which house, we might figure out who the 4th and 5th persons were.

    DRJ (15874d)

  236. The WaPo article suggested that the other two party-goers’ names are known, and that they have not yet responded to inquiries:

    Ford named two other teenagers who she said were at the party. Those individuals did not respond to messages on Sunday morning.

    Dave (445e97)

  237. This is all too perfect and has the makings for the perfect hit job.

    I think that is a biased interpretation.

    The “timing” is entirely consistent with the woman trying to get her story out without making her identity public. The WaPo clearly wouldn’t play that game, and neither did Feinstein.

    The lie detector test could very well have been an attempt to convince somebody to report her allegations without identifying her. It would appear that didn’t work either.

    Frankly, it looks like Feinstein handled the matter in a defensible way. If she had reached the point where Ford refused to identify herself, Feinstein’s choices were either to violate her trust by identifying the woman against her wishes (politically impossible), to ignore the matter entirely (politically impossible), or to make it somebody else’s problem. The third option is the obvious choice.

    You say it’s a perfect hit job, but I have a hard time believing the Democrats wouldn’t have wanted it in the headlines from Day One.

    Whining about the process is pointless.

    If she’s not telling the truth, the process is irrelevant.

    If she *is* telling the truth, the process is also irrelevant.

    I think it wiser to wait for her to answer questions under oath before jumping to conclusions based on motivated reasoning.

    Dave (445e97)

  238. Frankly, it looks like Feinstein handled the matter in a defensible way.

    I can’t agree with that, whatsoever, but I can agree that Erickson is biased. Feinstein could’ve brought up the accusation in committee and gone to the FBI in August without identifying the accuser. But once that letter was received by a politician, there should be no expectation that Ms. Ford could maintain her anonymity. If she really wanted her name out of it, she should’ve had her lawyer send it.
    Anyways, it’s going to be Anita Hill Redux because Ms. Ford said she would testify.

    Paul Montagu (1f900e)

  239. had helpfully had a polygraph done “by a former FBI agent” in early August

    the hot and horny men and women of the dirty FBI won’t rest til they’ve done a Putin-like coup on America

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  240. Thanks, Dave 240. So they may also know where the house is but aren’t disclosing it (which DCSCA likely believes is the case). Didn’t she also say she acted like nothing had happened when leaving, which would explain if the other two say they did not see anything?

    I agree seeing her testify will be the next step. I doubt it will reveal much but it is the next step. Testimony from the other people at the party and/or people who know the accuser are also possible. I’m sure the administration and the GOP have been looking into those things.

    But I don’t agree this story isn’t suspicious. It has been coordinated and designed for maximum impact on Kavanaugh’s confirmation. That is politics but real life is messier.

    DRJ (15874d)

  241. I agree, Paul.

    DRJ (15874d)

  242. These DC-area prep schools seem small and the students know each other. I wonder how many of the former students who signed a letter supporting Kavanaugh remember Blasey? Perhaps they attended other parties with her and Kavanaugh that Summer, especially parties late in the season, or in later years. The hearing could call them as witnesses to ask if Blasey acted nervous or upset around him, or said negative things about him.

    DRJ (15874d)

  243. Feinstein could’ve brought up the accusation in committee and gone to the FBI in August without identifying the accuser.

    It seems pretty likely that in August, Feinstein was trying to convince Ford to go public. If she had gone to the committee with an explosive accusation that nobody would stand up and take responsibility for, I strongly suspect that Erickson and anybody else emotionally vested in Kavanaugh’s confirmation would have freaked out, and rightly so.

    But once that letter was received by a politician, there should be no expectation that Ms. Ford could maintain her anonymity.

    I think you are projecting your own thought processes where they don’t fit. To the extent Feinstein believes Ford’s accusations, or even admits the possibility that she’s telling the truth, don’t you think she would be very sensitive to the victim’s wishes and feelings?

    Especially (if we want to be cynical) since she’s running for re-election against a more liberal Democrat and any hint of insensitivity or betrayal could be fatal?

    If she really wanted her name out of it, she should’ve had her lawyer send it.

    If she had, so what? It was lack of a victim willing to stand by the allegation that (properly) prevented it from being raised in the Senate. Having her lawyer sign the letter changes nothing.

    Dave (445e97)

  244. There is at least one iron law — your #metoo charges will not be heard if you remain anonymous. And there is a second law, if the political stakes are high, your life will be turned upside down (and maybe ruined) if you put your name out there.

    One observation — if Kavanaugh was a boozing teenager, or having a drunk weekend, he may not remember any of this, or remember it pretty hazily. His absolute denials may accurately reflect his memory — even if he did the stuff described.

    And one last thought — the Democrats approach throughout the hearing have reeked of partisan bad faith and desire for revenge for Merrick Garland. If Mr. Kavanaugh becomes a justice regardless of these accusations, it’s going to be hard to take their inevitable complaints seriously.

    Seems like the GOP is handling this correctly. There isn’t a big investigation to be done here. But the accuser deserves to be heard.

    Appalled (96665e)

  245. Dave, that’s not how lying serohw think. Dese lyin’ hos wanted to do their hitjob on Kavanaugh with as little inconvenience to deyselves and as little cross-examination as possible, dat’s all.

    nk (dbc370)

  246. I’ve said this already, but it bears repeating. This is all about delaying the vote till after the election. Trying to protect leftist Senators from making a difficult vote that will lose them voters in November no matter how they vote.

    It’s a clear set up, but you still have the usual suspects on her giving the left the benefit of the doubt. Acting like Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football over and over again.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  247. Absent a Perry Mason moment (which would require that someone who unquestionably knew them both at the time was at the party and is somehow able to give ironclad testimony so long after the fact) it seems to me like we are never going to know with any confidence what (if anything) transpired in that single incident.

    As with Clarence Thomas, it may instead hinge on whether Ms. Ford remains a lone accuser, or whether other women who Kavanaugh is known to have been in contact with can credibly accuse him of similar behavior.

    In that regard, the degree of scrutiny Kavanaugh has already survived in the course of multiple high-profile confirmation fights gives some cause for optimism.

    Dave (445e97)

  248. yeah but why would Mr. Kavanaugh rape just one young teenage girl

    he’s nothing if not driven and goal-oriented

    have we looked at his shopping mall habits yet

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  249. Turns out that 2012 was the first time Ford has told anyone about the alleged incident and that Kavanaugh’s mother was the judge in his attempted-rape accuser’s parents’ home-foreclosure case?

    Colonel Haiku (7f045b)

  250. for all we know Kavanaugh’s mother was in the house when he tried to rape her

    she should be questioned

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  251. As with Clarence Thomas, it may instead hinge on whether Ms. Ford remains a lone accuser, or whether other women who Kavanaugh is known to have been in contact with can credibly accuse him of similar behavior.

    Pfui! You can find a hundred lying witches willing to accuse a Republican of anything without leaving the Washington Post building. Or the NYT building. Or the NBC building. Or the CNN, CBS, ABS, NPR, and almost every other MSM building. You like Monty Python? A mob is not corroboration.

    nk (dbc370)

  252. A mob is not corroboration.

    it was good enough for dirty Mitt Romney

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  253. I think I’ve told you before that you can’t trust a man who does not smoke or drink.

    nk (dbc370)

  254. plus he’s a low-class harvardturd

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  255. I think this group is mistaken on Romney’s stance. It’s here:

    https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/1041470188837789696

    It’s the standard GOP “this woman deserves to be heard, but we aren’t slowing the train down for her”.

    Appalled (96665e)

  256. BTW, The Shadow books were written under the pseud. Maxwell Grant, not Walter B. Gibson (the creator) or Theodore Tinsley (the contract writer) in case you’re looking for them.

    nk (dbc370)

  257. I was watching the hash they made of the spirit movie with future black widow and Nick fury, actually he appeared in iron man that year.

    Narciso (36a055)

  258. The spirit was future Harvey specter of suits

    Narciso (36a055)

  259. Oh, we’re not miffed with Romney about anything he’s doing now. No, the reason we’re cross with him is because of what he said in the Roy Moore fiasco.

    nk (dbc370)

  260. Wait he’ll fold like a beach chair,

    Narciso (36a055)

  261. Mitt Romney’s a severely unprincipled person

    also, depraved

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  262. Moore has a reputation for probity, but it all it took were some vague campaigns and forged evidence and you threw him under the bus,

    Narciso (36a055)

  263. The election is only 2 months away, so we should do what McConnell said we should do in these situations:

    The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction…

    There. That’s all settled.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  264. Looks like Flake is the only altNeverTrumper keeping true to those cherished principles… whatever they are.

    Munroe (337886)

  265. The election is only 2 months away, so we should do what McConnell said we should do in these situations:

    Not the same thing. (But you knew that.) McConnell was talking about a nomination when the President was at the end of his term. You are conflating that with Congressional elections.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  266. Susan Collins (aka the vote that matters):

    “What is puzzling to me is the Democrats, by not bringing this out earlier, after having had the information for more than six weeks, have managed to cast a cloud of doubt on both the professor and the judge. If they believed Professor Ford, why didn’t they surface this information earlier so that he could be questioned about it. And if they didn’t believe her and chose to withhold the information, why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it? It is really not fair to either.”

    The bad faith the Democrats have demonstrated here is going to lose them this fight. And it should.

    Appalled (96665e)

  267. Elections are elections Chuck. You know that. It may not be an election to the POTUS, but of course our House and Senate elections matter too.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  268. 254, maybe it was an intentional room-locking by the mom (didnt the bedroom door let you lock it from the outside?), knowing the lemon she had to move off the lot.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  269. Heh! Alinsky Rule # whatever. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” It only works against Reoublicans, because the Democrats’ only rule is “Where’s mine?”

    nk (dbc370)

  270. The point of the exercise is to poison the well, if doesn’t matter if he gets it it makes his decisions,illegitimate, but that’s just narrative right?

    Narciso (36a055)

  271. she’s got a lot to answer for Mr. leftbehind

    what did Mama Kavanaugh know and when did she know it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  272. “The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction…

    There. That’s all settled.“

    The people said their piece in November 2016.

    Colonel Haiku (7f045b)

  273. New post up regarding Kavanaugh’s accuser going on record.

    Dana (023079)

  274. @234. Comparing elected officials who can be voted in and out to a lifetime appointment is just silly.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  275. @271. Pfft. It isn’t ‘bad faith’ to honor a request for anonymity. If it was you, you’d certainly expect that request be respected.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  276. So I’m pretty silly Dave? Shall we call each other names now?

    Patricia (5dc3f3)

  277. Elections are elections Chuck. You know that. It may not be an election to the POTUS, but of course our House and Senate elections matter too.

    During Republican administrations, Democrats said they would not confirm Supreme Court nominees in the President’t last year of his term. Republicans were just taking the Democrats at their word.

    But at no time has ANY party suggested that the President can’t nominate someone during an off-year election.

    The fact that you deliberately conflate the two things is proof of bad-faith arguing.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  278. Elections are elections Chuck. You know that. It may not be an election to the POTUS, but of course our House and Senate elections matter too.

    Let’s go a little further: Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan were both nominated by Democrat Presidents during off-year elections (1994 and 2010, respectively). At no time did any Republican suggest that the President shouldn’t nominate anyone that year.

    Apply that same logic to a Republican President during an off-year election.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  279. NJRob, I think you should reconsider this comment:

    Dave,

    your trolling notwithstanding, supporting leftism is all about the mass enslavement of the public. They know better than the individual how people should live. It’s about making sure people make the “right choices” for themselves, willingly or not.

    So get off your false white knight behavior because we all know what you are.

    Specifically, IMO it is a personal attack to claim someone is trolling without stating what comment you find objectionable and why. Ditto re “false white knight behavior because we all know what you are.” I hope you defend those statements with specifics or retract them.

    DRJ (15874d)

  280. That would have been a better comment on the right thread.

    DRJ (15874d)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.8252 secs.