About Dr. Ford’s Explanation For That Second Front Door
[guest post by Dana]
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford said this regarding her need for a second front door:
I told my husband before we were married that I had experienced a sexual assault. I had never told the details to anyone until May 2012, during a couples counseling session. The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed an extensive remodel of our home, and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand. In explaining why I wanted to have a second front door, I described the assault in detail.
During questioning, Sen. Feinstein asked Dr. Ford if the reason she wanted the second door was because she had claustrophobia as a result of her alleged assault. Dr. Ford confirmed it was.
However, a report out today raises questions about the veracity of Dr. Ford’s statement. From the investigation:
Ford never specified when the renovation took place, leaving a possible impression that it and the therapy session happened around the same time.
But documents reveal the door was installed years before as part of an addition, and has been used by renters and even a marriage counseling business.
“The door was not an escape route but an entrance route,” said an attorney familiar with the ongoing congressional investigation. “It appears the real plan for the second front door was to rent out a separate room.”
Public records confirm the assertion:
Palo Alto city records show that a building permit for an additional room and exterior door was issued to Ford and her husband on Feb. 4, 2008 — more than four years before the May 2012 therapy session where, she says, she first identified Kavanaugh as her attacker.
All the remodeling, including a new bathroom, was completed by February 2010. The only additional permits issued to Ford at her Palo Alto address are for “solar panels” on the roof, a “solar hot water system” in the garage, and an “electric vehicle charge station” for the driveway — all of which were issued after 2012.
Other documents, including health care-provider registration records, reveal that a marriage counselor listed Ford’s home address as her place of employment, ostensibly using the extra room and door for her clinical practice. That marriage therapist, Sylvia Adkins Randall, sold the home to the Fords in 2007, but continued to maintain the address for her business.
Contacted by phone, Dr. Randall expressed concern about her real estate transaction and prior relationship with Ford being reported.
“I don’t want it to be mentioned,” she said. “It’s personal.”
Randall is a licensed therapist who specializes in treating “disturbing memories from the past.” She supports Ford and described her allegation against Kavanaugh as “credible.”
Since the second front door was installed, moreover, students from local colleges have lived in the additional room with the private door. In fact, under congressional questioning Thursday, Ford testified she has “hosted” various other residents there, including “Google interns.”
The attorney said the tenants call into question Ford’s claims about why she installed the additional exterior door in her home.
“Renters and a business operating out of Dr. Ford’s home would explain the added door,” he said. “Clearly, there were business purposes [for it], not just ones related to her anxieties.”
The investigative report also notes that Dr. Ford and her husband own a second home by the beach. It does not have a second escape door:
Property records show Ford and her husband, Russell Ford, bought the beach house in 2007. This July – the same month Ford sent a letter to Feinstein accusing Kavanaugh of attacking her — Ford applied for permits to build a front porch and new decks at the home, located on Seaside Street in Santa Cruz. There is no application for a second front door, however, and the recent permits are the only ones applied for since 2007.
No evidence has emerged of any other exterior door construction at either of Ford’s homes, authorized or not.
A reasonable question asked:
“If she rents out the room to Google employees, how does she get access to the second door to escape a perceived attacker?” noted the attorney, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “Renting out the room is completely contrary to her stated reason of why she wanted the second front door.”
And then there is the questionable timing of her claims regarding the second door at her home:
But the far more recent story of the “second front door” also seemed to recede in Ford’s memory banks, only to pop up after speculation about her political motives grew.
She did not mention it in her original letter to Feinstein in July, or the statement she made for a polygraph exam in August, or a personal letter to Grassley last month. The tale of the door emerged, suddenly, on the eve of her testimony before Congress.
Note: While Dr. Randall says that she is not the therapist who treated Dr. Ford in 2012, she had this to offer:
Dr. Randall said she does not believe that the door was just a pretext to hide a political motive.
“Part of her trauma was feeling trapped, and that stayed with her,” she asserted.
Randall, who specializes in sexuality, depression, anxiety and fears and phobias, says that Ford’s failure to tell anyone for some 30 years about the high school incident stemmed not from “repressed memory syndrome” but from the simple fact she was “15 years old at the time and couldn’t tell anyone about it.”
“She didn’t want her parents to know she was drinking at a house without parents there,” Randall said. “There was a lot of shame involved.”
Anyway, all of this just leads to more questions. Questions that demand answers. But in order to get the necessary answers, the questions have to first be asked.
(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)
–Dana
.
Hello.
Dana (023079) — 10/2/2018 @ 8:09 pmWhat a tangwed web we weave when we fwost pwactice to deceive.
nk (dbc370) — 10/2/2018 @ 8:20 pmShe’s a peach!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 10/2/2018 @ 8:31 pmWhoa Nellie she be rumbling, stumbling and fumbling
mg (9e54f8) — 10/2/2018 @ 8:39 pmAll of this is just disgusting. If Democrats had any sense of propriety they would stand down and allow the vote on Kavanaugh and shut up about his alleged alcoholism and all that garbage, and in return Prof. Ford could go back to being a private citizen and we would just all pretend that Ramirez and the other crazy lady never existed. But I guess we’re well beyond that now. Patterico’s post regarding her ex-boyfriend’s letter just adds another layer of tawdriness and tackiness to this whole ordeal.
JVW (23cbc2) — 10/2/2018 @ 10:23 pmThanks Jeff Flake for the extra week, so now everyone’s reputation can be dragged through the mud.
JVW (23cbc2) — 10/2/2018 @ 10:23 pmDirty porn attorney/Flake/2020
mg (9e54f8) — 10/2/2018 @ 10:49 pmOne door closes; another one opens. Bet she’s popular at Home Depot.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 10/2/2018 @ 10:58 pmGee, who’da thunk she’s a pig. A lying, coached up pig who should have lots of splainin to do.
Except, the “I found Dr Fraud to be a credible witness” sissies won’t ax her about it.
Matador (39e0cd) — 10/2/2018 @ 11:50 pmI think it’s interesting that (as revealed in the article linked by Dana) a Jeff Toobin piece came out in the New Yorker warning about Kavanaugh being a possible Romney pick for the Supreme Court, less than two months before the therapy session where she first brought up Kavanaugh.
Patterico (115b1f) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:11 amJVW (#5)
Y’know, everyone thought they were joking in those high school movies where the authority types say “This is going to go on your permanent record. Ferris Bueller will never be a Supreme Court justice.
Appalled (96665e) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:15 amIn through the out door.
Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:16 amAnd the reason Kavanaugh might have been on that list was his (then recent) dissent in an ObamaCare appeal. I believe Kavanaugh thought the law was constitutional but that it might require further Congressional agreement to make that happen — which, of course, would have been impossible to get in 2011. Therefore, Kavanaugh could have been seen as an opponent of ObamaCare, something I suspect a liberal psychologist like Ford would be concerned about.
DRJ (46c88f) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:18 amThe dissent was in November 2011.
DRJ (46c88f) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:18 amI want to say that this really was a very inept setup on the part of her handlers, but I know from experience that there are some people who cannot even be “prepped” (in lawyer parlance) to testify let alone coached. Men and women.
nk (dbc370) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:36 amAt Christine Blasey Ford, we were the first dealership to install these before it was mandatory.
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:52 amGotta admit it, I don’t see what the brouhaha is about. Let’s indulge the proposition, for the moment, that Ford was testifying truthfully. Her testimony was consistent with her insistence on a “2d door” in the 2006 (?) remodel, and with her husband’s (and others) inability to understand why she was so insistent, to the extent she didn’t explain the claustrophobia/(alleged) attack at that time. Apparently she didn’t – which I don’t find unbelievable (having seen some marriage (non-)communications up close, myself), albeit odd; but then again “Yes, Dear” is oftentimes the wisest choice for a husband (and sometimes for a wife as well).
Perhaps I’m missing something, but I don’t see any reductio scenario being present here. Though I admit I’m somewhat at a loss as to the house and “front door” schematics/layout (in detail, and how exactly they relate to the testimony given) – but perhaps I’ve read things too superficially, or failed to click on a link or something.
That said, as Patterico suggested, it’s entirely possible that the whole reason the discussion came up in therapy (in 2012) re: the door and the assault, was because Ford’d read the Toobin New Yorker piece. That certainly would make sense, and Ford certainly looks like the type of gal that would read the New Yorker to boot.
Perhaps I’m missing something basic and crucial (wouldn’t be the first time), but, as I say, I don’t see what the brouhaha on this issue is all about. And perhaps that will continue, or perhaps I’ll be disabused of my ignorance.
Q! (86710c) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:20 amfor christine’s rape hoax to work she needed to explain why she was burbling about her fake rape 40 years later to a therapist
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:22 amWhat you’re missing is that the second door was not for her. It did not lead in or out of her living space. It was for a separate apartment/office that she rented out. That other people occupied. It had no more to do with any “claustrophobia” than the door on the house across the street.
nk (dbc370) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:27 amPerhaps I’m missing something basic and crucial (wouldn’t be the first time), but, as I say, I don’t see what the brouhaha on this issue is all about. And perhaps that will continue, or perhaps I’ll be disabused of my ignorance.
Apply this search for something basic and crucial to what this absurd brouhaha is about regarding what Kavanaugh has been accused of doing, the kind of things that would disqualify him as a SCOTUS justice. Accusations lacking one single shred of evidence beyond wild accusations that have repeatedly been found wanting in both gravity and consistency. Shirley, you can’t be that dense.
Skorcher (5b282a) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:31 am@19 nk .. And you know this, how? Please point me to what I’ve missed. Much obliged, in advance.
@20 Skorch .. Not terribly helpful, pal. But heartfelt, I am sure.
Q! (86710c) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:40 amErr, I read the post. You know, the one by Dana? Right above the comments?
nk (dbc370) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:43 amHonestly, Patterico, Dana, and JVW, sometimes I don’t know why you even bother.
nk (dbc370) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:44 amdoctor ford please show us on the doll where you fantasize Mr. Kavanaugh was touching you 40 years ago
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:45 amoh my goodness
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 9:45 amThings that make you go HMmmmmmmmm.
I particularly like the ending quote:
Remember parents, don’t shame your kids about underage drinking. This is really all Christine’s parents fault for shaming her.
Shame on you parents!
Dejectedhead (787359) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:14 amBecause it shows motive before thought as to the deception, NBC altered audio tape, abc video tape. The times compressed the call record, to create the Sanford frame.
Levick the outfit that Lanny Davis owned for two years but white hats on gitmo detainees like said Al shihri and Abe sufyan bin qumu
narciso (d1f714) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:19 amI want to disbelieve Ms. Ford because I am always troubled by decades-later uncorroborated undisprovable statements. The two doors don’t quite do it for me. First the earlier picture shows an ugly covering that could have had the door under it already. And second, there may well have been another door put on the house – perhaps in the back or on the side. We just don’t know enough about the facts and probably never will. There would have to be more facts available. Just like there would have to be a lot more facts available to come anywhere close to substantiating Ms. Ford’s claims. I had the same issues with Clarence Thomas. I was quite a junior lawyer in a large law firm and was pretty liberal at the time and thought Thomas’s appointment was cynical and I didn’t like his politics. All the same, I was deeply troubled that he could be torpedoed by unprovable and undisprovable allegations made years later and in some respects was still relieved when he was confirmed because it was unthinkable to me that mere allegations in that setting would result in a down vote. I’ve come to like and (agree much of the time with) Thomas over the decades. But I feel the same about Kavanaugh – the claims about Ford seem as, or more, provable than the claims made about Kavanaugh but both come up too short to cause life-changing decisions to be made based upon them.
lazlo toth (bcff1b) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:28 am“And perhaps that will continue, or perhaps I’ll be disabused of my ignorance.”
Where there’s a will there is a way. Keep hope alive!
Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:46 amI’m very disturbed and in all honesty surprised by how this has played out. So many people are certain that not only is Kavanaugh a serial rapist, but those who support him are supporting rapists.
It’s such a sad thing that both sides think so little of the other side. Instead of thinking “hey millions of people don’t agree with me… what is the real reason for that?” they assume that millions of people believe in something absurd and horrible.
Because of this leap of bad faith, they don’t consider the concept of due process. We get a weird twist on lynching hysteria. We don’t talk about reasonable doubt, eyewitness problems, etc. And it’s intense how much hatred this one issue has generated.
The minds behind it are never going to be accountable.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:54 am@22 nk You know, it’s perfectly fine to admit that you cannot point to anything in support of your assertion that establishes (authoritatively or otherwise) that [the second door] did not lead in or out of her living space. It was for a separate apartment/office that she rented out. That other people occupied. It had no more to do with any “claustrophobia” than the door on the house across the street. [Emph. added] It’s really ok to be wrong, and even to admit that you were wrong. Not so ok to pretend otherwise.
Q! (86710c) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:59 amQ! is such a disrespectful commenter. It’s fine that he writes the way he does (even though it’s embarrassing). I’m not Ok with his series of passive aggressive insults to many commenters here over the past couple of weeks.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:04 am“I need a second door, husband mine,” said the dirty rape hoax lady.
And he knew from her tone that this. was. not. the. hill.
A second door she would have, toot and also sweet.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:11 amI’m not Ok with his series of passive aggressive insults
I’ve been under the impression that Q! is female. Hence the passive aggressive. Am I wrong?
Skorcher (5b282a) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:22 amQ!,
Quite simply, if you have such a severe case of claustrophobia that you need a second front door, how does having one that is exclusively used to function as the door the front door to another person’ s dwelling place help with that?
Dana (787359) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:32 am“Foiled again!” said the raper to nobody in particular.
“When am i gonna learn to check to see if there’s a second bedroom exit and plan accordingly? They keep getting away!”
His was a tale of vexation and fruitless stalking, and he was beginning to question whether he was truly suited to this avocation.
He was focused and committed, but he just couldn’t get his head around this idea that rooms could have multiple exits.
Truth be told, the very idea of a such a room filled him with anxiety and a foreboding sense of futility, and he attributed this to a childhood trauma he experienced several decades ago when he was in high school.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:53 amoopers
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 11:54 ama@35 Dana Quite simply, if you have such a severe case of claustrophobia that you need a second front door, how does having one that is exclusively used to function as the door the front door to another person’ s dwelling place help with that?
Makes no sense to me at all, Dana. I agree. (Even if I’d quibble, and substitute “want” for “need”). But, like I wrote “originally (@17) … I admit I’m somewhat at a loss as to the house and “front door” schematics/layout (in detail, and how exactly they relate to the testimony given)…. Notwithstanding the referenced article (which I had read, before I posted) and the subsequent protestations of nk, for example, I am no better informed on that subject than I was a couple of hours ago. I certainly have no reason to adopt the position asserted by nk in his response to me. Which is not to say that all that he wrote, as he wrote it, is not absolutely true. It may be. It may not be. I just have been offered no particularly good (or even mediocre) reason to believe that it is. The difference (imo) is between substantial evidence and (possibly lucky and accurate) conjecture.
If we were to adopt “the best evidence rule” here, I’d expect to see the plans that building authorities typically require before permits are issued. Before/after. Certainly, they must do that in spades in most local jurisdictions in California! (Ever taken a gander at the California Codes? Just the statutes and rules themselves take up yards and yards of bookshelf space!) But I really have no clue as to what the house looked like before the remodel, and what it looked like after. I really don’t know to what extent (if any) there came to be a house within the house (so to speak). Not saying it didn’t happen that way. Just that I have no particular reason to believe it did. (Not to mention the possibility (now that I’m spit-balling it in my mind) that the remodel began with a particular purpose in mind (“freak-out door”) and ended up with a different purpose (with a possible change in the permitting?)). Coulda, shoulda, mighta, maybe, possible, dunno. Done speculating, in any event, for the moment. Regards.
Q! (86710c) — 10/3/2018 @ 12:02 pmTaht was certainly the impression with which I got, and Senator Feinstein too, although maybe she’s just tasking direction from her staff)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript
From CBF’s prepared statement:
Explaining = May 2012 .
Why I wanted = future tense = the door hadn’t yet been installed as of May, 2012..
Now you could read it as:
Completed = past tense. (and “wanted” as “had wanted then”)
Even so, you’d assume it was the recent past.
If this was a trial there’d be discovery or Brady violations all over the place.
Here is Dianne Feinstein lobbing a softball qwuestion to get her to talk about the door. She has to try twice:
This sounded like the wntire house was now a place to host Google interns, and they no longer lived in it.
The moral here is: if you think somebody is lying, the supporting evidence that they bring is also probably a lie.
It’s looking more and more like none of this is real. No narrow escape and no clasutrophobia either. Not Brett Kavanaugh and not anybody else either. Nothing happened toher any more than something happened to Tawana Brawley (well Tawana Brawley was beaten up, from time to time, by her mother and step-father.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawana_Brawley_rape_allegations
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 10/3/2018 @ 12:19 pmWell my goal is not to insult. I just can tell when someone hopes to get under the skin of people they disagree with, instead of trying to understand the different point of view. It’s not worth my time to think about that. I shouldn’t have mentioned it.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 12:32 pmApologies to Little Feat
Rock and Roll DoctorRockin’ Juris DoctorThere was a woman in Cali didn’t feel just right
Had confusion all day and delusions at night
Well things got worse, yes a serious bind
At times like this it takes a man with such style that you cannot often find
Politician of the heart and a reader of minds
If you see our flag and you’re on yo feet
he’s the man to meet
Teh twang starts angry and ends up sweet
He can’t be beat
If you wanna feel the fire, just give him teh floor teh man will never tire
He’s from a country town but don’t be fooled
Democrats have pounced but they end up schooled
Nagodoches to New York City
He leaves ‘em bloody, and it ain’t pretty
The late McCain and he, they had their very own thing
A law degree from SC, at times he’s been a JAG
He’s a master debater, and doncha call him no f*g
If you see our flag and you’re on yo feet
Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:13 pmhe’s the man to meet
Teh twang starts angry and ends up sweet
He can’t be beat
If you… If you wanna
If you wanna feel real nice, just ask the Juris Doctor’s advice
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 10:54 am
People have been lied to, and urged to show their good faith and good character by rushing to judgement.
Some of the people who have been lied to think that there is no case to be made for the otehr side so they attribute any support for Kavanaugh to some form of prejudice, or placing judicial philosophy above truth, or succumbing too political pressure especially for the politicians among them
Surely they will keep on trying and eventually get caught.
I think these minds, by the way, intended to get Kavanaugh to look angry – maybe somehow seeded that advice to Kavanaugh. I think they think they are so smart they don’t realize that it doesn’t mean very much.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:23 pmThe Democcrats have also played the game of “connect the dots” (while supplying the dots)
That’s why Kavanaugh is always drunk in all the accusations.
Plus I guess it undermines any wqitnesses to hsi good character as you can say to them: But you never saw him drunk. So you never saw how alcohol turns him from Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde.
SO now we had the FBI – which is not an investigation – it’s done by completely different people than those who do a criminal investigation.
At first (I think) the Democrats were complaining that the results should be given to the opublic but today or yesterday Senator Dianne Feinstein demanded the FBI report be sealed.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:29 pmI mean I was troubled by how angry he was, but if I were in his shoes, I would have flipped that table over. It’s so easy to come to conclusions about temperament, but it’s very hard to really put myself in his shoes.
Both sides need to try, we hear this all the time. It’s actually really tiresome to hear that even though it’s true. Remember that “go-od m-an” (hyphens needed for the filter) meme here? Patterico was raked over the coals just for raising his kids to see the other side realistically. To some, that showed weakness, when really it shows confidence in one’s own point of view.
The people who cannot tolerate a conversation on the opposite point of view, either in criticism or defense of Kavanaugh… they don’t have confidence in themselves. We’ve all taken these aggressive leaps of faith on politics. The democrats and republicans both have no reason to be happy with it. The debt of a republican admin, the foreign policy of a democrat one… a lot of the big problems don’t actually change when we trust politicians to change it. We’re deflected into attacking the other, but we won’t listen if we don’t have confidence in ourselves.
Just my take.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:34 pmI mean I was troubled by how angry he was
you’s think cameltoe and diane moo goo gai pan feinstein and slimy coward Jeff Flake would be every bit as mad, but you can tell they know damn well Christine Ford’s a dirty rape liar
everyone knows she’s a liar, but very few people give a damn
and i think it’s that apathy what incenses Mr. Kavanaugh more than anything – how nonchalantly his life and family are being destroyed
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:41 pmthat’s kinda been the takeaway from all this: how normal and unremarkable it’s become for Americans to lie about rape and to support people who lie about rape
this is just part of being an american today
it wasn’t like this before Obama, but now it’s just the way Americans are
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:45 pmdude
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:52 pmThat it not a sane interpretation of the other perspective. They believe she was sexually assaulted. Often, get this and I’m not kidding, often because they’ve experienced sexually abusive stuff in drunken parties. They think her story makes some sense, do not want to discourage coming forward, and then see a guy say he likes beer beer and also beer, so it all clicks.
The problem is that they need to understand due process and look at the holes and weaknesses in Ford’s account, but it’s hard to do when they are told they already knew she was a liar and just hate Kavanaugh because they are politics nutcases.
both sides suck at thinking about the other perspective.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:55 pmthey’re terrible people, these people what work so hard to further trivialize rape in America Mr. Dustin
just awful people
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:56 pmRemember that one president who bragged about grabbing them by the p—-? Might have something to do with the political movement regarding conduct like that at the same time as he’s president. I know this is a stretch.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 1:57 pmThey believe she was sexually assaulted.
i don’t think they believe her even a little
i think they admire her willingness to lie
but they all understand they may have to drop lying rape hoaxer Christine like a hot rock any second now – they’re all scared to death what might be in the fbi report
and they know that her slapdash hoax is already wholly dependent on the rape hoaxing CNN Jake Tapper media doing everything it can to suppress evidence that counters the narrative
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 2:01 pmRemember that one president who bragged about grabbing them by the p-?
Mitt Romney seems to have taken this as a license to lie about Roy Moore, just as Jeff Flake is lying about Mr. Kavanaugh.
These people are deeply sick and dishonest.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 10/3/2018 @ 2:03 pm@44. Sometimes, history can rhyme, too…
“And, ah because these people are plugging for, for keeps and that they should call the FBI in and say that ‘we wish for the country, don’t go any further into this case, period!” – President Richard Nixon, Watergate ‘Smoking Gun tape,’ June 17, 1972
This ‘Moscow Circus’ looks so bad for the country, the institutions and how it projects what it values to the citizenry and to those observing abroad. And Putin smiled…
DCSCA (797bc0) — 10/3/2018 @ 2:23 pmThe people who cannot tolerate a conversation on the opposite point of view, either in criticism or defense of Kavanaugh… they don’t have confidence in themselves. This would also apply to the current president, as we’ve seen here on the pages at Patterico’s.
Further, did you see this, Dustin, concerning due process? Compare and contrast:
Dana (023079) — 10/3/2018 @ 2:40 pmDana, indeed the democrats do care what the investigation turns up if it is bad for Team R, and only if.
I love the oxymoronic term “incredibly credible” he is using. It really signifies how his brain is shut off as far as she is concerned.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 3:02 pmThanks for the excellent post, Dana (and getting us back on topic)!
Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5) — 10/3/2018 @ 3:35 pmThe people who cannot tolerate a conversation on the opposite point of view, either in criticism or defense of Kavanaugh… they don’t have confidence in themselves.
1) Not when the premise is a bold face lie. That is like engaging in a defense of oneself when one asks how often do you beat your wife.
2) Bush. They piled on and he was demure. It set up lots of distortions as facts.
So this point above is the triumph of “theory” over reality.
It is a classic Leftist approach to policy and a class NeverTrump approach to principles.
Theory says … then proceed to ignore how wrong it is.
Bob the Builder (9af831) — 10/3/2018 @ 3:41 pmThanks, Col. Haiku. I appreciate that.
Dana (6bc3b0) — 10/3/2018 @ 4:04 pmI would expect the people who believe this to be the most upset about how this has been used by the D’s. But I don’t see much of that.
This isn’t someone else’s fault for not letting them backdown and save face. They abandoned due process, really any semblance of fairness to play dirty politics, and some of them are partisan nutcases.
frosty48 (cc42f7) — 10/3/2018 @ 4:21 pmbob the builder proves my point.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:10 pmBecause a narrative was crafted, otherwise they would dismiss her with so little evidence.
Narciso (d1f714) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:13 pmBack at the ranch
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409817-russia-collusion-bombshell-dnc-lawyers-met-with-fbi-on-dossier-before
Narciso (d1f714) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:26 pmSeems rather important, narciso.
Colonel Haiku (3ad005) — 10/3/2018 @ 8:47 pmSo far I haven’t read anything anywhere else about the front door problem , not even the New York Post or teh Wakk Street Journal.
Which only goes to shwo how bad the major media are.
A careful rereading of her testimony makes it very plausible that RealClearInvestigations is correct (and not lying)
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 10/4/2018 @ 12:52 pm