Patterico's Pontifications

9/22/2018

Christine Blasey Ford “Accepts” Offer to Testify with Late Response That Is Not Really an Acceptance

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:37 pm



If the game here were truly to delay and obstruct while painting Republican senators as white male bullies, how would this response be any different?

Let’s review the bidding. Grassley keeps setting deadlines and setting conditions. Ford’s lawyer ignores the deadlines, calls Grassley a bully, and makes absurd demands that make no sense (like demanding that Kavanaugh testify first, which gives him no chance to respond to Ford’s allegations). As Dana noted yesterday, Grassley demanded a response by last night, which was deemed more bullying and ignored. Now, today, we have the media falsely reporting that Ford has “accepted” the invitation without actually coming to a meeting of the minds on the critical details, like when and how this will occur.

Ford is trying to show she is in charge. But she isn’t. In the end, the Senate is in charge. I don’t oppose their showing flexibility as long as they are willing to be firm in the end. Doing it this way allows them to say: look, we tried. They kept ignoring our deadlines, over and over, and finally we had no choice but to set a hearing.

The media will act like they are rejecting her “acceptance” but the media often lies and distorts to the detriment of conservatives. In the end, Grassley will have to stand up and be a man, and take action that will be portrayed as jamming this nomination down Democrats’ throats.

The concern that a “cloud” will hang over Kavanaugh’s head as a result is overstated. A “cloud” has arguably hung over Clarence Thomas’s head his whole career. So what? He’s been a great justice — the best justice sitting on the Court right now — and he’s given us a lot of great votes and opinions. Kavanaugh will be great too. Stop worrying about a “cloud” and let’s get this done.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

192 Responses to “Christine Blasey Ford “Accepts” Offer to Testify with Late Response That Is Not Really an Acceptance”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (1a35e1)

  2. but isn’t she still too crazy to get on an airplane?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  3. Grassley will have to stand up and be a man

    yes yes, unless pompous arizona coward Jeffy Flake and odious lobsterpot bimbo Susan Collins tell him to sit down and be a good girl

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  4. Indeed, Patterico, indeed.

    This is all Kabuki theater. This has all been gamed out from the beginning based on the mistakes made with Anita Hill. Best to have no hearing, just the trial in the media, along with the media’s judgement on the GOP’s “unwillingness” to even listen to the allegations.

    CNN even has a “feminist” (read: advocate of special rights for weak women) who says:

    That means ensuring that Ford’s allegations are investigated by experts who have experience in handling the trauma of sexual assault and violence. That also means ensuring that, unlike Hill, we don’t insist on putting Ford on trial for being a survivor of sexual assault. And that means ensuring that critics who obfuscate and dismiss Ford’s charges as outdated antics of his youth do not prevail.

    So, they are already setting up for not having a hearing, since the GOP-run committee is just a bunch of rapers anyway.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/opinions/blasey-ford-hill-dont-repeat-1991-lichtman/index.html

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  5. but isn’t she still too crazy to get on an airplane?

    This will be another reasons for delay — she has to take the train or be driven. She’s afraid someone will blow up the plane to get at her.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  6. You guys don’t actually believe that Feinstein didn’t share that letter with Schumer and co last July, do you? They just decided that it would make a better splash (and delay) in September/October.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  7. If Jeff Flake wants to attend as much as a barbecue in AZ during the rest of his life, he’ll vote AYE.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  8. And suppose- just suppose, Dr. Ford’s accusations turn out to have some credibility; the question remains: ‘why would anybody make this up’ and put their life, the lives of their family and associates and their reputations through this.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  9. Very good. all that Grassley need do now is send this response: Very glad to hear that you have accepted; We’ll see you on Wednesday.

    felipe (023cc9)

  10. Yes let’s keep pretending that she isn’t the pawn of demand justice, this weaker than a filler episode of scandal.

    Narciso (bce9d9)

  11. Politically, her story was first told to Rep Eschoo, who says she told Feinstein and Feinstein requested a letter. Thereafter Ford’s name was divulged.

    Grassley still hasn’t been given a copy of the unredacted letter with her allegations.

    DRJ (15874d)

  12. Because, DCSCA, she’ll wind up with a full professorship someplace nice and a stipend from the Clinton Foundation.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  13. Grassley still hasn’t been given a copy of the unredacted letter with her allegations.

    “Dear Senator Feinstein:

    I would like to help you sink this terrible candidate, so here is the story I will tell…”

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  14. Response: the hearing will be held on Wednesday at ______AM. Dr. Blasey Ford will testify before Judge Kavanaugh. Safe travels.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. The Red Mass is next Sunday. Absurd that such a devout and good Catholic will not be able to participate.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  16. New twist on a Chistine Blasey FORD skit- a negotiation for a new car sale that gets stalled into past midnight and the car is a lemon base model.

    urbanleftbehind (10b73a)

  17. It’s worth noting again that the ridicule of Dr. Ford’s accusations mirrors almost word-for-word what was said by many associates of my friend and colleague some years ago who had their accusations and credibility on a serious life-death issue publicly challenged. My friend was accused of being ‘mentally unstable,’ and of ‘grandstanding’ to enhance career opportunities. Patterico is aware of this individual. Which is why I asked my friend then the question then that fits here today: ‘why would anyone make this up?’

    In the end, the accusations were found to be true.

    Why would Dr. Ford turn her life upside down by making this up and put herself, her reputation and her family through this hell? Knowing someone who has actually lived through a real life ‘Hitchcock scenario’ and the aftermath for years after changes your perspective some. That said, personally, believe Ford is credible. And believe Kavanaugh and those associated with him from those rowdy high school times will ‘deny, deny, deny’ or feign the standard, ‘I don’t recall’ for obvious reasons and want to distance themselves. It doesn’t do their lives and careers any good being drawn into the spotlight over this. This isn’t a criminal proceeding but a job interview for a lifetime appointment. But if Kavanaugh was up for a lifetime job as your daughter’s gym teachers, you’d likely want this lurker run to ground. And the FS has list of 20 or 30 qualified conservatives at the ready. So unless the Senate flips, which is hard to see, a conservative is going to get the SCOTUS slot no matter what. It’s up to McConnell [who advised the WH this candidate would be difficult] to corral enough votes, anyway.

    But strip out any angst and personal politics or media biases you may harbor and just make a list of how many corporate or government office holders -high profile or low- have managed to survive and keep or secure their gigs over the past two or three years in this ‘MeToo’ era battling this kind of accusation. The latest big name, Les Moonves, had Lynda Carter, a close friend of his who knew him for nearly 40 years, publicly vouched for his character, but clearly didn’t know him well enough and he still went down in flames.

    Make the list of names; you’ll likely find it is a very, very short one– but one near the top has to be Donald Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  18. 9 the question has been asked and answered several times now. What gives?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  19. The concern that a “cloud” will hang over Kavanaugh’s head as a result is overstated. A “cloud” has arguably hung over Clarence Thomas’s head his whole career. So what? He’s been a great justice — the best justice sitting on the Court right now — and he’s given us a lot of great votes and opinions. Kavanaugh will be great too. Stop worrying about a “cloud” and let’s get this done.

    I pointed this out in the other thread, but it bears repeating since I don’t think the “cloud” is what Grassley, et al, should be concerned with.

    This is.

    Loss of one senate seat (and four states were decided by less than 1% in 2016 ) could prevent dozens of conservative nominees, or even another Supreme, from being confirmed in the next two years.

    You may say, well, the LeftMedia will pillory the Republicans whatever happens, and of course that’s true, but I do not believe we are at the point where the vote every person in the country is already pre-ordained. What happens in the next six weeks will have consequences for the election results, and it is perilous to believe otherwise.

    Kavanaugh’s ultimate confirmation should obviously be non-negotiable. One can make the case that every day that passes gives Trump another day to screw things up by shooting his mouth off, and that’s true. But otherwise, if Kavanaugh has enough votes for confirmation, he has enough whether they are counted this Monday or next Monday.

    Making every concession that doesn’t materially worsen Kavanaugh’s chances (in the interest of avoiding a 51-49 Democratic Senate, decided by 0.2% of the vote in Montana or wherever) just seems like common sense.

    Dave (445e97)

  20. I say cloudy with a chance of meatballs. Bugger-off, Democrats.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  21. My theory that the Sun is God lighting his fart was ridiculed in exactly the same way as Galileo!

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  22. Note that DCSCA, the life-long Republican, is one more time taking the Democrat side. What is that now, 50 for 50?

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  23. 538 lost their cred in 2016.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  24. Make the list of names; you’ll likely find it is a very, very short one– but one near the top has to be Donald Trump.

    near?

    he’s always at the tippy-top of my lists!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  25. Yes like an 8 track tape stuck in a 76 camaro.

    Narciso (bce9d9)

  26. @13. Kevin, Dr. Ford and her family don’t appear to be missing any meals. There is a difference between being ‘famous’ and ‘infamous,’ too. There are easier paths, far from the spotlight, to wealth and security in America.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  27. Dave,

    Off topic, but newspapers and magazines are being bought up left and right. Just never by conservatives as that causes an industry-wide hissy fit. But if a “progressive” (read: neo-Communist) buys them, it’s all good.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  28. Well he is a Rockefeller Republican. Jay Rockefeller.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  29. Democrats are the answer to the question no one is asking.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  30. DCSCA,

    It’s true that we are seeing a lot of coastal elites get caught up in sex scandals, but do you think it is possible not all the men in this country act that way? Is it possible that some men have character?

    DRJ (15874d)

  31. I think they already made a movie about this sugar land express, vanishing point or was it smokey and the bandit. hope she has a fast car.

    lany (7dfb51)

  32. #28: Not everyone has the same wish for anonymity. Some people want the spotlight, to be seen as heroes by their peers. And that’s assuming the reasons are simple.

    As I said before, this could be like some “hate crimes” where the “crime” is self-inflicted to take the heat off something else.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  33. But I’m done with your constant stupid question. Asked and answered. Next time the response will be rude.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  34. you have to ask for consent every step so if you wanna do a hug you gotta say is it ok if we do hugs now and then if you wanna make a kiss on her you have to say ok that was a great hug but now i wanna do a kiss on you is that ok?

    and then after that it gets all HBO after dark and some of it’s awkward but you still gotta ask about everything

    and that’s how you make sexy with a woman like Christine

    and it is so good

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  35. Rude responses will be moderated. Try ignoring.

    DRJ (15874d)

  36. @24. Kevin, I’ve often noted on other threads my political position and the trade off in so far as the court goes, so whichever conservative gets the SCOTUS slot it is of zero consequence to me. The politics of it mean little and there are 20 or 30 other qualified names on the FS list as well. Penn State would have saved face and millions of dollars and the Catholic Church avoided its current problems if both institutions had simply been willing to go the extra mile and run these sort of issues to ground.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  37. 538 lost their cred in 2016.

    Actually, 538 had the election going for Trump the night before. It had the Senate right, too. Yes, they had it breaking Red only at the end, but that’s pretty much what happened.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  38. Well, DRJ, to be honest, some rude responses will be moderated. Some are more equal than others.

    Simon Jester (fa301d)

  39. DCSCA, I’m not sure hearings like this are good ways to get the truth because they are political and public. That’s what law enforcement is for.

    DRJ (15874d)

  40. 538 lost their cred in 2016.

    Perhaps it would seem that way to someone ignorant of statistics.

    But really the opposite is true.

    Dave (445e97)

  41. Rude responses about public figures are fair game but probably aren’t persuasive. My understanding is that rudeness to other commenters is no longer allowed.

    DRJ (15874d)

  42. @DCSCA:why would anybody make this up’ and put their life, the lives of their family and associates and their reputations through this.

    People make decisions that damage “their life, the lives of their family and associates and their reputations” all the time and there are many reasons for it as there are humans who do it.

    Examples are too numerous to list.

    I made your exact argument about Bill Clinton in the Lewinski hearings. Why would a man with everything to lose risk it all for that? Why would such a clever lawyer makes such a stupid lie? I learned. Smart people do dumb things sometimes.

    Ford may be powerfully motivated by the conviction her story is true and not be “making it up” in that sense. There are dozens of adults who believe to this day they were abducted and abused by day care workers and saw children murdered–none of these things happened, yet they are not liars and in fact a few of those they accused are still imprisoned.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  43. 39… he just lucked out on that last day. He’d been going back and forth between the two during the last week of October and the first week of November, lol. Just depended on the day.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  44. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, the question “Why would anybody…?” very often has a very simple and obvious answer: “Because they thought they could get away with it.”

    Mystery solved!

    Dave (445e97)

  45. she’s a buffoon

    if she thought Mr. K had rape tendencies why didn’t she try to protect other womens from him doing rape on them?

    for all she knows he’s been a-rapin’ and a-rapin’ for the last 37 years and she did nothing!

    whaaaa?

    now let’s talk about character

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  46. @32. Well, DRJ, as noted on another thread, in college in the 1970’s- between 18 and 21 years of age, w/a 24 hour beer tap, a frat bro roommate now a University of Pittsburgh professor who was then the campus drug dealer [yet I never smoked/ate or used the stuff- amazing] and another who drank, passed out in public, sold nickle bags and did has, who became a judge and family man in New Jersey, I cop to having virtually no character in those years at all. And it didn’t help that films like ‘Animal House’ glorified the behavior. I am a little surprised the behavior attributed to both F and K went on earlier in HS, but then, they were prep schools which operate a little more protectively. This is going to come down to where you want to draw the line in 2018- remember, Doug Ginsberg had to withdraw in 1987 from the SCOTUS nod for smoking grass in law school. Can’t see that being an issue at all in 2018. Times change. K could probably get hired as an airline pilot, a corporate attorney– even run for elected office and win, but for a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS over this issue in the ‘MeeToo’ times, maybe- or maybe be not. The times are changing almost as fast as this story.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  47. You have assumed the story is true.

    DRJ (15874d)

  48. @44. Well, we’ll likely all hear and see her, assuming it’s a public hearing, and all decide on our own rom what we witness, but in the end, it’s really in the hands of the Senate.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  49. last gasp of diane fienstein soon she will be replaced along with other corporate establishment democrats by alexandra ocasio-cortez clones.

    lany (7dfb51)

  50. Now we know the 5th person there was a girl. Maybe Ford didn’t want to go public about this story when she was young. But while you are considering how this sounds truthful based on your friend’s experience, ask her if she would have left a girl alone with 3 boys (1 or 2 of whom were dangerous), without warning her or getting her help.

    DRJ (15874d)

  51. @DCSCA:The times are changing almost as fast as this story.

    Yes they are. The vaguer the accusation, the heavier the burden of proof on the accused. And if there’s no criminal penalty involved, the burden on the accused is heavier yet. After all, no one had a right to an athletic scholarship, or a seat on a court.

    So if Ford has no facts to add beyond what was alleged, well hopefully Kavanaugh has his daily planner for 1981 – 1983 and witnesses who can prove where he was at every minute. Survivors of sexual assault can’t be expected to provide any details, or change them–maybe she’ll remember it wasn’t a party, or it wasn’t in the evening, or it wasn’t in the summer of 1981 – 1983.

    The times are changing indeed.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  52. @48. DRJ, example: in ‘ride season’ a frat bro got so drunk and high, he was barely conscious– the pledges put him in a second-hand suit, drove him to the airport in Erie, bought him a ticket to LaGuardia and told the stews he’d just left his bachelor party and was getting married in New Jersey the next day. They poured him on the plane [security was nothing like it is today] it departed on schedule and he landed w/a headache and a hangover in NYC. But the pledges were kind- he was from NJ so he was able to get his brother to pick him up and get him back to the college in a day or two.

    That was clearly an irresponsible, immature and stupid thing to do to somebody- but it seems grrrrrreat at the time. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  53. @DCSCA:That was clearly an irresponsible, immature and stupid thing to do to somebody- but it seems grrrrrreat at the time.

    I don’t understand why anyone would put their lives, their family’s lives, their associates lives, their reputations at risk…

    And of course other white frat boys have assualted women at parties so yeah, assume Kavanaugh did it, he was white and a frat boy and went to parties. Unless he has that three years of day planner and corroborating witnesses. Unless they’re also white frat boys. They all just lie each other up like Duke Lacrosse did to Crystal Mangum.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  54. Anecdotes about misbehaving boys exist, as do examples of lying rape victims. Both can be true, we just don’t know which is true here or if the truth is something else.

    DRJ (15874d)

  55. @49. See my #18, DRJ.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  56. Thank you but I read your 18 before I posted my comments. You seem to give her experience a lot of weight but you give no weight to the fact there are rape hoaxes.

    DRJ (15874d)

  57. Rep. Joe Kennedy III
    @RepJoeKennedy
    2 out of 3 sexual assaults are never reported. Might have something to do with the fact that for every 1,000 rapes, 994 perpetrators walk free. And the fact that men in power make statements like this one.
    __ _

    Nathan the Wurtzelhearted
    @NathanWurtzel
    What are the statistics outside of your family?

    harkin (aacf42)

  58. Actually, 538 had the election going for Trump the night before. It had the Senate right, too. Yes, they had it breaking Red only at the end, but that’s pretty much what happened.

    On election day, 538’s final model gave Trump about a 30% chance of victory.

    On election day, Trump’s own people also gave him about a 30% chance of victory.

    One of the reasons 538’s model gave Trump a better chance than others was that they correctly included the possibility of a correlated systematic error in polling, where others tended to treat the states as being statistically independent.

    And they include a similar correlation of uncertainties in their Senate forecast.

    In any case, we don’t need to believe any fancy model to understand that the GOP is far from having a lock on control of the Senate.

    Dave (445e97)

  59. @56. Very few people- particularly work associates- believed my friend noted in #18 at the time, either, DRJ. Turned out for reasons known only to them at the time. And in the end, the accusations proved credible. So having known somebody who has been through a similar ‘Hitchcock scenario’ I’m less likely to be so immediately dismissive- hence, my ‘why would anybody make this up’ question. But that’s me.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  60. Your friend had workplace harassment, right? Isn’t that different than this?

    DRJ (15874d)

  61. I have been a woman in the workplace and I know a little about this topic. Teen parties are very different from the workplace.

    DRJ (15874d)

  62. #7 I think DF shared it with other D’s but sat on it because it wasn’t solid enough. I think KH leaked it to the press and pushed it out into the public.

    Each day this smells more like crazy and desperate. I’m not saying DF wouldn’t leak it at the last minute but I would expect something more solid from her.

    frosty48 (3cc40d)

  63. @32. Been in the media biz 35 years, DRJ, and know a bit about how it operates- and I do find it a little disturbing to see the candidate being ‘marketed’ on the TeeVee like a box of Ivory Soap flakes by the Judicial Watch Network and such. Run their funding to ground if you can. Guess those are the times we live in. But as w/most advertising, it can make a product appear better than it is. [My favorite was when the product manager told the agency to put marbles in the Campbell’s Alphabet Soup for photo shoots so the letters ‘floated’ on top.] Sometimes selling the sizzle and not the steak can be tricky. But then, then there’s Trump Steaks.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  64. @62. My point is my friend was repeatedly told her accusations weren’t ‘credible’ and was accused of being ‘mentally unstable’ and ‘grandstanding’ for career advancement and wasn’t to be believed. It was a ‘Hitchcock scenario.’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  65. DCSCA, this has been asked and answered several times but you’ve made almost the exact same post multiple times across several threads now.

    Outside of the thread, King (her schoolmate who confirmed and then unconfirmed the story) provided a very good literal answer to your question. Do you agree that KIng provides at least one answer to your question or is there some way to distinguish it?

    This statement against interest sort of argument has merit. But it doesn’t establish credibility.

    Is there a next step to this process?

    frosty48 (3cc40d)

  66. @67. Not really. Answers serving political spin service the spin. But strip all that out, consider the consequences in this day and age, and the basic question remains. It’s the same question asked about Nixon during Watergate- ‘why would they do it;’ they were far ahead of McGovern and the rest and winning across the board. Very few believed the story in the beginning- but in the end, it was true. I’m just not so instantly dismissive of her credibility nor willing to slur her character, having known someone who endured similar circumstances – at least until she testifies. But that’s me.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  67. You can be sure there will be a cloud. Justice Bart O’Kavanaugh and the occupant of the Garland Memorial seat won’t be forgotten.

    briefly (2f8ea9)

  68. That said, personally, believe Ford is credible.

    I said earlier that I’m reserving judgment, and I still am. As for Ms. Ford’s credibility, to me it depends on whether she shows up before the Judiciary Committee and, if she makes it, what she actually says. If she bails, and I don’t care what excuse she or her lawyer uses, then I’ll judge her credibility accordingly.

    Paul Montagu (cbbfc4)

  69. @46. Dave, revisit what happened to Doug Ginsburg, Reagan’s SCOTUS nom in 1987. He had to withdraw his name from nomination because he had smoked some reefer in law school. ‘Because he thought he could get away with it’ back then? Maybe today, in 2018– can’t see someone getting yanked for that today. For better or worse, it’s the ‘meetoo’ era– times change.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  70. the weirdest thing about this is how everybody who says they believe this weirdo is lying

    she brings no evidence to the table

    she’s emotionally stunted and goofy (scared to fly cause flying is just like being RAPED by Brett Kavanaugh in the 80s … seriously girlfriend?)

    she’s a miserable ridiculous pussyhatter

    and her attorney’s a butt-ugly che guevara groupie

    this is so not even

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  71. In Thomas’s case I think the “cloud” made him a better justice

    frosty48 (3cc40d)

  72. Arizona’s other disgraceful coward senator is fully on board with ruining Kavanaugh’s life and reputation

    meanwhile his dirty racist son is ruined for life by his own logic

    ineligible for gainful employment anywhere

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  73. Agree Thomas is the best, have always been able to understand his writings. Hope he serves till he is a hundred and ten.

    mg (9e54f8)

  74. Camero SS, narciso?

    mg (9e54f8)

  75. @58. My focus is on not instantly dismissing a person’s credibility not any aledged criminality. This is a job interview, not a criminal proceeding. She could have just as easily accused him of being a closet drunkard or a Russian agent and you’d want it run to ground.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  76. why does he want a slot on Hollywood squares, I mean MSNBC, and why couldn’t he stay communing with the antelope,

    so this witness, will tell us where and when this happened,

    narciso (d1f714)

  77. So guess who is Ford’s newest attorney?

    Narciso (39957d)

  78. Andrew McCabe, just a coincidence

    Narciso (39957d)

  79. It’s terrible for Kavanaugh, but just think of all those other judges who won’t be accused of attacking Dr Ford now. Their relief can’t be measured.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  80. The job interview part of this process was with Trump. The Senate’s job is to advise and consent to the President’s nominations. Senators don’t get to pick who is nominated so it is not really a job interview. The only choices are to approve or to veto his choices.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  81. For better or worse, it’s the ‘meetoo’ era– times change.

    Fast forward 10 years. GOP nominee scuttled after 1997 picture of him with a plastic straw surfaces.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  82. @82. Sure it is- it’s part of the ‘job interviewing’ process the Senate committee assumes. Trump could just as easily have interviewed Ronald McDonald, liked the cut of his jib and the price of his Quarter Pounder w/Cheese and nominated him. And the Senate would chew on that whopper and ‘advise and consent’ accordingly.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  83. BTW, why would anyone prefer to be questioned (twice) by 21 Senators, rather than by a single committee attorney?

    In the first case you’ll get non-sequitur attacks on people not present, grandstanding, froth, sound and fury, and emotional hostage-taking. For more than a day.

    In the second case, it will be over in an hour, and you will remember what happened.

    Assuming you want your case hear, the second option seems better. If, however, you are simply a tool then you want the Senators to have their face-time.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  84. 84–

    But he didn’t. Instead he picked a nominee who was so well qualified that it took UTTER AND COMPLETE BULLSH1T to have a shot at defeating him. BORK they at least fought on the basis of ideas. This is an uber-Borking.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  85. Perhaps a meta-Borking.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  86. I think a lot of people might be surprised by this line:

    “The study finds that the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. grew steadily throughout the 1990s and reached a peak in 2007/2008. The number of unauthorized migrants has since leveled off and become stable. “

    Davethulhu (41e784)

  87. 59… ouch, baby, yeah…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  88. The Saturday Night Massacre was sufficient reason to block Bork.

    Davethulhu (41e784)

  89. @87. Kevin, revisit Doug Ginsburg’s forced withdrawal in 1987 — over smoking some grass in law school. Doubt, in 2018, that sort of accusation would crater a nomination. Times are different now.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  90. Yale Study: “There are probably twice as many illegal immigrants living in America as commonly believed”

    https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/21/yale-study-may-twice-many-illegal-immigrants-living-america-commonly-believed/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  91. CNN reports this evening both sides traded phone calls and hearing is now ‘tentatively set’ for Thursday and Ford will appear to testify. More details to be worked out tomorrow.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  92. Using the wrong pronoun, however.

    narciso (d1f714)

  93. If Kavanaugh is confirmed I am going to listen to Jackie Gleason say “how Sweet It Is for 10 minutes!

    mg (9e54f8)

  94. It’s the greatest line when hitting the number rolling the bones.

    mg (9e54f8)

  95. Whereas igs looking into democratic sinecures are called senile or crazy, special prosecutors are deemed sex obsessed

    narciso (d1f714)

  96. I agree with the comments that do not demand immediate gratification. Grassley and the other Republicans who support Kavanaugh should stay within their expertise: Wheeling and dealing and bringing the caucus into line. Everything they do should be geared to sending Kavanaugh to the floor with 51 votes. (Did you know that Spence can be the 51st? Yes, yes, he can. Yay!) Whenever it happens. That will be the best way of all possible ways to tell Professor Doctor Christine Margaret Blasey Ford, Ph.D. to go pound sand.

    nk (dbc370)

  97. She could have just as easily accused him of being a closet drunkard or a Russian agent and you’d want it run to ground.

    Maybe. But I would then expect the next step to be the person providing some evidence to support the claim. If the “evidence” was some version of “I was an eye witness but I don’t remember where or when it was or how either of us came to be in the same place” I would want to ask more questions before I started any running. If as I asked more questions the situation didn’t improve or there might be some evidence of bias my desire to run that particular “it” to ground would decline.

    I would love for her to testify, I think the committee should try to make that happen, and I think she has an obligation to cooperate. I don’t think she will. I’m not sure why they haven’t done something simple like send out the FBI to get her statement. We’ve seen that lying to the FBI is sometimes a big deal and she feels strongly about getting them involved.

    frosty48 (3cc40d)

  98. CBS had a story that some staffer had corresponded with a,corroborating witness. How they would know this your guess is as good as mine

    Narciso (6a4407)

  99. Advise And Consent, the movie. From 1962 and totally topical today. From a book by Allen Drury, directed by Otto Preminger, with Henry Fonda, Charles Laughton, and Gene Tierney among others, you can’t go wrong.

    nk (dbc370)

  100. Wa Post link
    Washington Post doing what they can to destroy Kavanaugh.

    NJRob (92060f)

  101. It’s all about a search for truth, or democracy dies in darkness, or something I don’t see enough outrage here,

    Narciso (6a4407)

  102. @92–

    Way to completely miss a point. See also 83. But you are in such utter denial about the flagrant dishonesty of what your party (the Democrats) is doing that you trot out all kinds on non-sequiturs in defense.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  103. She could have just as easily accused him of being a closet drunkard or a Russian agent and you’d want it run to ground.

    She could have accused him of being a Red Lectroid from Planet 10, and all the usual suspects would have been demanding hearings.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  104. “Can we set up a time later this afternoon to continue our negotiations?”

    Answer: Sure. Now’s good.

    Should have been the response given and accepted by Ford’s people otherwise it was not a serious offer.
    This negotiation should have over in less than 2 hours

    steveg (a9dcab)

  105. Washington Post doing what they can to destroy Kavanaugh.

    The Washington Post has jumped every shark in existence since Bezos bought the paper.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  106. If she were a skrull would she believe anything differently.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  107. https://ktvq.com/cnn-us-politics/2018/09/22/senate-judiciary-committee-contacts-fords-friend-about-party/

    Now we have a woman that was alleged to be at the party saying nope, she wasn’t there and she doesn’t know Kavanaugh.

    Now that we have a woman’s statement, which is worth that of an undefinable number of men in the #metoo era, can we put an end to this charade?

    NJRob (92060f)

  108. 113, as always, but who’s the judicial Richelieu to counteract? http://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/ivanka-trump-advised-her-father-180745527.html

    urbanleftbehind (10b73a)

  109. “SO NOW THE LAST NAMED WITNESS HAS CONTRADICTED CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD:

    As the Senate Judiciary Committee staff negotiates with attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of a past sexual assault, over a potential hearing on Thursday, Republican staffers are working to interview those who may have information about the alleged incident.

    CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.

    On Saturday night, her lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee..

    “Simply put,” Walsh said, “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

    The lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford’s.

    Keyser is the latest person alleged to be at the party to say she has no recollection of it.

    “I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article,” a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.

    Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the allegations, telling sources he was “flabbergasted” when he learned of them.

    “This is a completely and totally false allegation,” he said after Ford came forward. “I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone.”

    In addition, two others have issued statements.

    “I have no memory of this alleged incident,” said Mark Judge in a September 18 letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said he did not recall the party and never saw Brett Kavanaugh act in the matter Ford describes.

    In addition, Patrick J. Smyth issued a statement. “I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post,” Smyth said in his statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”

    “Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have.”

    This is bullshit. Stop fooling around and take the vote.

    By the way, Leland Keyser is Democrat Bob Beckel’s ex-wife.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/308264/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  110. “SO NOW THE LAST NAMED WITNESS HAS CONTRADICTED CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD:

    As the Senate Judiciary Committee staff negotiates with attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of a past sexual assault, over a potential hearing on Thursday, Republican staffers are working to interview those who may have information about the alleged incident.

    CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.

    On Saturday night, her lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee..

    “Simply put,” Walsh said, “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

    The lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford’s.

    Keyser is the latest person alleged to be at the party to say she has no recollection of it.

    “I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article,” a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.

    Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the allegations, telling sources he was “flabbergasted” when he learned of them.

    “This is a completely and totally false allegation,” he said after Ford came forward. “I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone.”

    In addition, two others have issued statements.

    “I have no memory of this alleged incident,” said Mark Judge in a September 18 letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said he did not recall the party and never saw Brett Kavanaugh act in the matter Ford describes.

    In addition, Patrick J. Smyth issued a statement. “I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post,” Smyth said in his statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”

    “Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have.”

    This is bullsh*t. Stop fooling around and take the vote.

    By the way, Leland Keyser is Democrat Bob Beckel’s ex-wife.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/308264/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  111. That should about wrap it up, eh, narciso?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  112. Ford’s female friend is … Bob Beckel’s ex-wife.

    LOL.

    Dave (445e97)

  113. You would think but they are driving that training over the shattered span bridge like at the end of the lone ranger where they finally use the classic theme.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  114. Four people at the supposed party and 3 deny under oath, they were there.

    Memories
    Light the corners of my mind
    Misty watercolor memories

    Can it be that it was all so simple then
    Or has time rewritten every line?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  115. The Washington Post has jumped every shark in existence since Bezos bought the paper.

    Every story, even the sports section, takes a shot at Trump. Usually, the WaPo was reasonably liberal -left, except during election times.

    Now, under Bezos, its the DNC national gazette.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  116. Isn’t it amazing how the AP and all the MSM, went with the misleading headline of “Ford agrees to testify next week”?

    After all, she did no such thing.

    Is the AP and MSM, hopelessly stupid or dishonest.

    You make the call!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  117. Its a hive mind, they just read the press release off a fax;

    Narciso (6a4407)

  118. I agree with Tammy Bruce who says the Dems are buying time to come up with any witness of any kind from any time in BK’s life. Grassley is a fool.

    Call the votes, including those postponed for 17 other judges last week.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  119. I eagerly await DCSCA’s dissimulation of extreme hypotheticals where the story could be true. He’s already compared Kavanaugh to Les Moonves, and since he likes talking about #metoo so much, Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Bob Menendez, Garrison Keillor, Bill Clinton, Louis CK and Al Franken by extension.

    Sorry, but #MeToo was specifically about going after high-profile liberal men who buy indulgences for near and current bad behavior via constantly mouthing Democrat party platitudes. It’s not described as such. But its targets all fit the profile!

    It isn’t about opportunistic character assassination of men with records of actual public service and accomplishment. They have no friends in media who assassinate (literally or figuratively) their targets for them with the twisted language of political correctness and the rabid hatred of partisans betrayed.

    Abandon your stretch goals, #metoo is not a movement whose energy you can easily coopt and pushing it hard is going to rouse Republican and independent voters against the Democrats with the unmistakeable stench of Hillary and Anita Hill (which may in fact be the plan, in which case I want America to see as much of Christine Ford as possible before Kavanaugh is confirmed prior to the new SC session.)

    Then I want loud denunciations of her lies and deceit in every single campaign ad until the election, to make a firm example of her for anyone tempted to ‘just give their story’ to high-ranking Democrat operatives.

    Rogue DMV Agent (cd73ff)

  120. “Ford agrees to testify next week” is fine if the next headline is “Now Ford refuses to testify”, but it’s more likely to be “Republicans refuse to let Ford testify”.

    Yes, the Washington Post is a giant slime bucket. Did you know that Bob Woodward works there?

    nk (dbc370)

  121. DCSCA seems to be the lone dissenter, on the side of Blasey Ford, in all these threads. I don’t know why he would put himself through that.

    nk (dbc370)

  122. GrAssley’s cornfield tactics are laughable.

    mg (9e54f8)

  123. The six foot invisible rabbit is never wrong nk.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  124. “DCSCA seems to be the lone dissenter, on the side of Blasey Ford, in all these threads. I don’t know why he would put himself through that.”

    Most likely for the same reason Blasey-Ford herself did-that sweet, sweet, Shareblue money.

    Rogue DMV Agent (37b536)

  125. @125. Inaccurate. REvist my comment, #18. As noted, there are likely less high profiled individuals you could ferret out as well. But go ahead and make a list; you’ll likely find it is a very, very short one– but a name on it near the top has to be Donald Trump.

    @127. See # 18.

    @129. Meh. Perhaps it and Mike Judge may have shared a cab in their youthful escapades.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  126. After four strikes they throw away the bat,

    Narciso (6a4407)

  127. E.g., 113 … NJRob … Now we have a woman that was alleged to be at the party saying nope, she wasn’t there and she doesn’t know Kavanaugh. [Para.] Now *** can we put an end to this charade?

    Too funny. Stricken with venom, & self-consigned to misrepresent the record. The relevant record:

    “Simply put,” Walsh [Ms. Keyser’s attorney] said, “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

    A quite foreseeable exchange at hearing (possible, hypothetical, reasonable, non-charade-supporting):

    Q:

    Professor Blasey, does it surprise you that Ms. Keyser has stated that she was not at the party where you claim Judge Kavanaugh assaulted you?

    CBF:

    No. First off, she did not say she wasn’t there, but rather that she didn’t recollect being at any party that Brett Kavanaugh also attended. In fact I probably would have been surprised if she had remembered what to her was no doubt an unremarkable random party over 30 years ago. I can assure you that normally I wouldn’t have remembered that party at all, myself. Probably not 5 or even 2 years later, and certainly not 30 years later, except for the fact that Judge Kavanaugh attempted to rape me at that party, but he was, thank God, too drunk to do so.

    Likewise, after all these years, I have no recollection whether Ms. Keyser was acquainted with Brett Kavanaugh at that time, apart from their both being present at that party. I suppose I very well might have known that, at that time, for Ms. Keyser and I were friends. That she says she “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh” now, surprises me not in the least, and I certainly do not take her statement to assert that she denies ever having met or socialized with him at all, back in our high school days. Both from my personal experience, and my studies in psychology, I believe it would strain credulity to believe that such a statement — 30 plus years on — would or could be truly honestly made, except in rather unusual circumstances. For example, where the denier has a truly remarkable memory — at least for the sort of thing under discussion. And, for example, where the “party denied” was famous at the time, and denier was cognizant of that fame, at the time. (E.g., one’s assertion that one had never met Martin Luther King.)

    Q! (86710c)

  128. Ah John de lance, don’t ever change.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  129. Playing pepper in front of a no pepper sign…

    mg (10b7f2)

  130. 134… this is a big part of the problem… the preponderance of sophists and outright scoundrels who provide cover for the mendacity.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  131. The challenge for Democrats and their errand boys is to find even a single witness that will back up her tale.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  132. Is the AP and MSM, hopelessly stupid or dishonest.

    Try “AND”

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  133. Bezos probably gives $10K per anti-Trump article.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  134. The post knew about keyser, when they spoke to judge.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  135. It’s like when Atali the daughter of Ymir the Frost Giant tried to lure Conan into a trap so her brothers could kill him and “lay his smoking heart on [their] father’s table” but Conan killed them instead and then chased down Atali and was about to take against her will what she had lured him with but she cried out to Ymir her father and he spirited her away and all Conan was left with was her gossamer veil and Atali now has a #MeToo story that she tells to all the Valkyries at meetings of the Asgardian Organization For Women Who Wear Chain Mail Or Nothing and I probably should not be making jokes about this because everybody knows that toxic masculinity is a disease which infects American society and no woman is ever safe when men are around.

    nk (dbc370)

  136. I remember that tale because it was translated into Spanish

    Narciso (6a4407)

  137. It’s bad enough that people are saying that Ford’s inability to remember details is evidence of the truth of her story–now Q is saying that Ford’s witnesses inability to remember details is evidence of the truth of her story.

    As I said above, the new standard is that the vaguer the accusation, the heavier the burden of proof on the accused. We are not going to like the new rules.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  138. You c

    nk (dbc370)

  139. Sorry. You can read everything Robert E. Howard wrote for free by following that link. It’s all good.

    nk (dbc370)

  140. The norse country was a bit off the beaten path for comedians no?

    Narciso (6a4407)

  141. @102. Meh, nk, so you’re expecting President Pence to name his own nominee?

    Spoiler alert: in that flick, Lefffingwell, the SoS nominee selected by the president, lied under oath to the committee about attending commie meetings; the committee chairman was pressured and blackmailed w/evidence of some past transgression that had a whiff of truth to it by some fringe party wackos and cut his throat, the vote came in deadlocked as the president dropped dead and the new president decided not to break the tie and to name his own nominee.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  142. James Bassett in harm’s way also by preminger features flawed persons, Kirk Douglas in particular not to mention hugh obrien.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  143. Rogue 130 and narciso 129, are your comments fair representations of DCSCA’s argument?

    DRJ (15874d)

  144. I was,speaking of the posts impeccable sourcing, apparently they had to x out miss Ingham out of the story completely because marrative.

    Narciso (6a4407)

  145. I’d still like to know why Blasey left another girl in a house with a boy who she says attacked her. If it was her good friend Leland at the party, leaving her there is even stranger.

    DRJ (15874d)

  146. Q!,

    your partisanship is showing. No evidence. Multiple witnesses that she named said it never happened. Contact DiFi with something else. This tar isn’t sticking.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  147. I am deeply concerned that this delay game is all about setting the stage for a betrayal from certain elected Republicans at the last minute.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  148. @ 152 DRJ .. I’d still like to know why Blasey left another girl in a house with a boy who she says attacked her. If it was her good friend Leland at the party, leaving her there is even stranger.

    Assuming there’s a hearing and the professor testifies, you can reasonably rest assured that the question will be asked. The professor may well even have an answer aside from “I dunno”, and that answer may reflect badly on the 15 year old, or perhaps not so badly at all. Stay tuned.

    Q! (86710c)

  149. And that she never told her close lifelong friend who she left at the party alone with these guys? Never ever.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  150. @153 NJR … your partisanship is showing. No evidence. [blah, blah]

    Oh, most excellently argued! But, I’m rubber, and you’re glue [blah, blah]!

    Q! (86710c)

  151. If Kavanaugh had named a witness who he said was with him and Judge and they were in, say Gstaad instead of Georgetown on the night of the party (assuming we even knew within a year what night that was), and that witness were to say “I have never met Judge and have no recollection of ever have been in any place where he was present, with or without Kavanaugh, Gstaad or anywhere else”–I have a hard time believing that Q! would say that witness is not contradicting Kavanaugh’s story.

    And yet Q! interprets Keyser’s statement as not contradicting Ford’s story.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  152. I’d still like to know why Blasey left another girl in a house

    It was all about HER.

    Kevin M (e9a4b1)

  153. Sophistry from errand boy scoundrels providing cover for the mendacious Democrats.

    I bet they’re proud of themselves.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  154. Q!,

    I’m not much of a partisan. I challenge you to presume Kavanaugh’s innocence. After all, eyewitness testimony of traumatic events is extremely dangerous to rely upon, and decades old memories are going to be tainted by our own mental processes. Imagine this man really were innocent and how easily a mistake could be made. Put all the nonsense about negotiating from the partisan handlers aside. If you were investigating this yourself, can you imagine the victim telling the truth, yet the suspect being innocent? I can. We don’t know if there’s going to be some evidence that corroborates her story, but that is also a problem. If that evidence exists, it’s being kept secret as an ambush, so that it’s more difficult to defend against it. That’s not how we should handle an open and honest inquiry of something that happened a long time ago. So either there isn’t sufficient evidence, or it’s being handled unfairly.

    I think it’s already obvious that this investigation should have been a more private one, and that making this public was very unfair to everyone involved, and the people who exposed Ford’s name to the public should be investigated themselves.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  155. I have tried to be a good republican ;but its like trying to be a good nazi! retiring senator jeff flake.

    lany (200904)

  156. @ 161 .. Dustin ..

    Imagine this man really were innocent and how easily a mistake could be made.

    I can indeed imagine he is wholly innocent of the claimed assault, and that deciding yea or nay on the claim of assault is a fraught question.

    If you were investigating this yourself, can you imagine the victim telling the truth, yet the suspect being innocent? I can.

    I believe in “objective truth” (for lack of a better term), so I cannot imagine that if the professor is telling the truth, the judge can then be innocent of the truth which the professor has given voice to.

    I also believe that folks may believe things (even things about themselves and their own life experiences) which simply are not objectively true. Ordinarily in such circumstances, I would not say that such people are “lying” if they assert their mistaken beliefs to be true – but that frankly depends to a certain degree (I wager, and I speak in regards to how I judge or categorize behavior) on my perception and judgment that they are being reasonably (intellectually / emotionally) honest.

    So either there isn’t sufficient evidence, or it’s being handled unfairly.

    As to your assertion that so there isn’t sufficient evidence, I am uncomprehending (sorry) as to what the “so” refers to. What in that which you wrote earlier purports to establish a lack of “sufficient evidence”? Myself, I have no doubts that there are many women who have in fact been sexually assaulted and who “sucked it up” as best they could, and didn’t ever share the experience or didn’t share it for decades. In a court case, one could expect experts to testify on either side, in an appropriate case in this regard. Of course, the majority here wants no such airing of fact &/or opinion (though presumably Ford’s attorneys would like to present such witnesses). In this general vein, the majority apparently won’t even consent to the subpoena-ing of Mark Judge – the examination of whom I wager would be quite revealing. Personally, I find the majority’s denial in this regard (Mark Ford) to be a craven, unfair and wholly bad faith decision. Wholly. Speaking of the unfair handling of evidence.

    In this regard, from what I know of “the evidence” available, I find the professor’s account to be credible, and nothing that I’ve read (and I’ve read quite a bit) really raises any appreciable doubt as to her account. Perhaps I’ll react differently when I see her testify (assuming this goes to hearing), or perhaps the judge’s testimony will somehow overwhelm that of the professor, in my judgment.

    … the people who exposed Ford’s name to the public should be investigated themselves.

    I agree. And in fact I think that it would be wholly proper to investigate this, so far as possible, by questions put to the professor. I’d like to have as complete an understanding of how we got to where we are (as far as leaks, etc.), and her testimony may be revealing on that point – or may not be much revealing. If it is revealing, that may be relevant to her credibility, on top of the “process questions”. If I were King (Emperor?), I’d probably have a hearing and cross-examine Feinstein herself and her staff and maybe some others (not predicting or prejudging the result, of course), but I suspect that’ll never happen, eh? Anyway, that’s a hypothetical (and impossible) task for another day.

    Regards.

    Q! (86710c)

  157. Duke lacrosse team.

    mg (9e54f8)

  158. 163 whoops . . . in this regard (Mark Ford) to be a craven . . . should read . . . in this regard (Mark Judge) to be a craven . . .

    164 .. mg Not even a sentence, much less an argument, much less a developed argument, much, much less a remotely responsible argument, much, much, much less a good argument. But thanks for dropping by, and adding your 2 cents! (Worth every penny!)

    Q! (86710c)

  159. so now rape fantasy girl’s all lawyered up with sleazy criminal FBI man-lick Andy McCabe’s attorney?

    she’s like a sleaze magnet

    i wonder if she’s been a sleaze magnet her whole nasty life

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  160. @164. It cuts both ways; Penn State’s Jerry Sandusky; Former House Speaker Denny Hastert; the Catholic church…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  161. don’t forget Mitt “bad touch” Romney

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  162. And I suspect that’s the secret agenda behind the hate towards Kavanaugh, and against Anthony for retiring with a Republican president in office. That now the Supreme Court will not proceed to the next step of making pedophilia a Constitutional right. Not Roe v. Wade like they claim — Kennedy was not especially pro-abortion.

    nk (dbc370)

  163. Summing up the weak:
    https://www.americanthinker.com/

    Narciso (b80f14)

  164. Duke lacrosse team were screwed by a loser d. a. I thought everyone new that.

    mg (10b7f2)

  165. The Senate Judiciary Committee reached out to Leland Ingham Keyser, a friend of Christine Blasey Ford. Ford claims Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed when he was drunk, covered her mouth, and tried to remove her clothing at a party in the early 1980s when they were in high school.

    Keyser’s lawyer, Howard Walsh, responded to the committee late Saturday in a written statement.

    “Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,” the attorney wrote.

    Matador (39e0cd)

  166. Ford is a troubled womyn.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  167. Meh. I did not review as thoroughly as I thought, Colonel

    As usual, you guys waaay beat me to it. Well done.

    Matador (39e0cd)

  168. “Playing pepper in front of a no pepper sign…”

    Nice.
    __ _

    Kimberley Strassel
    @KimStrassel
    10) In its most recent update tonight, WaPo writes: “Before her name became public, Ford told The Post she did not think Keyser would remember the party because nothing remarkable had happened there, as far as Keyser was aware……

    …..11) Wow. “Before her name became public, Ford told…” That is WaPo admitting that it had the name, and had Ford’s response to what would clearly be a Keyser denial, but NEVER PUT IT OUT THERE. Again, why? A lot of people have a lot questions to answer.

    harkin (ea7bff)

  169. There is said to be some information/evidence that the WaPo withheld.

    https://twitter.com/LegInsurrection/status/1043830838193016832

    Also news that the so-called Feinstein Letter wasn’t sent to Feinstein.

    Democracy Teh Democrats Thrive in Selective Darkness

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  170. That’s it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  171. Speaking on Judge refusing to testify:

    “That is astounding to me,” Hirono said. “He was right there in that room. He refuses to testify.”

    I think we’ve missed a possible eye witness.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  172. #tehLingeringStench

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  173. tehLingeringStench
    teh stench is making me clench
    red diaper dopers

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  174. mazie hirono
    be cuckoo for coconuts
    there is no there there

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  175. He who laughs last… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1gYJDQXPOk

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  176. Turn it up!!!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  177. 187- I turned it up and lmao. Even had my lib sister laughing.

    mg (9e54f8)

  178. Sad isn’t it, Inouye for all his faults was a brace fighter once upon a time.

    Narciso (39957d)

  179. Hirono/GrAssley/2020

    mg (10b7f2)

  180. The Catholic church in Chicago…
    nk (dbc370) — 9/23/2018 @ 4:07 am

    There is a gay mafia within the Catholic Church that put out a hit on a Whistleblower who tried to do something about the filth.

    felipe (023cc9)

  181. I believe in “objective truth” (for lack of a better term), so I cannot imagine that if the professor is telling the truth, the judge can then be innocent of the truth which the professor has given voice to.

    Seems very easy to me. She could have mistaken the identity of the perpetrator of her assault. Then she would be telling the truth about her experience, and so would he in denying he did it.

    This really happens and it’s unwise to ignore that possibility, particularly if there are other reasons to suspect memory issues (alcohol was involved, so much time has elapsed, and the lack of many details). Granted we haven’t even heard her speak directly about it, but I worry that she will be too well coached for her testimony to be that helpful.

    In this regard, from what I know of “the evidence” available, I find the professor’s account to be credible

    Well, she has destroyed her life and inspired the hatred of probably more than a million people so I’ll give her that much. But to be clear, I don’t think doubting the accuracy of her identification or description of the event is necessarily an attack on her character. Sure, for many, either Kavanaugh is a serial gang rapist, or these accusers are all die hard democrat operatives hell bent on ruining innocent people with false rape accusations. Reality tends to be less black and white.

    Dustin (ba94b2)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4999 secs.