She is testifying. Hopefully, that clears up.
“To me, it all comes back to: what’s in it for the accuser/victim to lie? IMO, pretty darn little”.
In this case – IMO, a tremendous amount. If that wasn’t the case, it wouldn’t be the lead story every day. Since others have touched on the subject I hope I am safe saying this – of course it is about preventing his nomination. It is about running out the clock in the hopes that the process can’t be repeated with another nominee before the midterms.
“When my high-school buddies and I got together and exchanged memories of that time, we found ourselves genuinely shocked at the stuff we got away with.”
I could say the same. So could many people I know. I came nowhere close to assaulting another person or committing a crime. And, in general, I honestly don’t know what the comments in this post have to do with Kavanaugh. They are not his statements. That’s certainly not a “source” of the “considerable evidence” to me, if you are responding to my question.
"Kavanaugh also gave speeches in 2014 and 2015 that referenced his drinking or that “what happened at G Prep, stays at G Prep”.
I saw video of him making this comment. It was very obviously said tongue in cheek and he looked like a huge dork saying it.
“I read somewhere that the reason the therapist did not record Kavanaugh’s name was because that is best practices for therapists.”
I haven’t seen this reported anywhere. If this is true, then hopefully Dr. Ford will address this under oath on Monday. My understanding is that she released the therapist from confidentiality for this piece of her life, so if that is correct information, I’m confused why that wouldn’t be receiving wider press coverage. Because the fact that she did not name Kavanaugh is certainly an issue of concern for many who doubt her story.
Full investigation? There’s no way to prove that it did or did not happen. It’s all a ploy. No upside for her? LOL.
I’m not sure you are going to find qualified nominees willing to expose their whole life to this type of circus in the future. Who wants to be asked what happened in junior high? Yes, it is an honor to serve on the Supreme Court, but anyone nominated already has a stellar career, and the partisan circus this has become is unworthy of candidates. RBG is right, this is ridiculous.
“In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.”
I haven’t seen this but if this was the case – why wouldn’t Dr. Ford have said something then? If this process now is truly about saving the country from an evil man, why wouldn’t that logic apply to the appeals court level? That’s no small thing. There are definitely cases that SCOTUS doesn’t choose to hear and there are cases where – due to death or recusal – SCOTUS is a tie. Isn’t it the case that in those circumstances the decision reverts back to the appeals court level? In which case Kavanaugh could potentially have a huge impact on people’s lives. Yet nothing was said. And Dr. Ford is an educated woman. No way she didn’t understand what role a federal judge plays.
At this point, the genie can’t be put back in the bottle. I don’t understand why anyone would object to whatever type of investigation could be done at this point to determine whether or not the allegations are truthful. Kavanaugh should want that, the committee should want that, as should everyone else.
Unless you’ve been through a sexual assault yourself, it isn’t possible to know why a woman would come forward, or would not. It makes no sense to try to parse Dr. Ford’s reasons.
If this is the new standard, anyone can torpedo any new SC nominee with unverified allegations.
You honestly don’t understand the objection? You don’t understand the timeline on this, the political and court ramifications? You haven’t heard that this could be a minefield for certain politicians, and that if the balance in the senate changes, this president might not be able to get any of his choices in the court? Hence one side wants a delay and the other side doesn’t.
The call for an investigation is not to get the truth, but to get a delay. Is there anyone following this debacle that actually doesn’t know this?
It took the FBI a total of two days to investigate Anita Hill’s claims. Pretty sure the same could be done in this case.
Groping is not a federal offense and the statute of limitations ran out long ago on whatever happened at the teen party. What basis do you think and which law enforcement should follow up and either way she is the one who would get investigated. Kavanaugh has been investigated at least six times. So what would be investigated exactly? She won’t say exactly when this happened. She isn’t exactly sure where. She is the only one left to be investigated. Is it going to help her if whatever investigative body discovers she was a heavy drinker in her teens? Is it going to help her if every middle aged guy who graduated Georgetown Prep claims they dont know anything and no one they know would do something like that? This is not going well for her and it is so sad really. It is not a legal issue now in 2018 it is a purely political issue and I wonder if she understands that. She needs to show up on Monday. Plus if Kavanaugh’s appointment gets derailed she’s got huge legal exposure in my mind. His wife is getting death threats and he has been called a rapist publically even though legally that is not what would have been the charge at the time and he more likely is not a rapist. He is probably pretty angry right now and justifiably if she bails on Monday leaving him no ability to refute anything. She is really between a rock and a hard place and I feel sorry for her and hope she is getting wise personal counsel.
I don’t understand what can be “investigated”. No physical evidence. No address; somewhere in Chevy Chase?, Montgomery County, MD, with a pool. No date; summer?. Times are foggy.
I’m sure nobody would object to a weekend investigation…except if they found nothing (and I don’t know how you find anything with almost no specific details or witnesses that happened 36 years ago), it would be deemed a scam investigation because they didn’t perform due diligence.
100% certain this is not about an investigation, just the delay. Dr. Ford is just a pawn in their game now. She trusted the wrong people and probably regrets bringing it up.
I know there was a person who went to the same school who posted something on social media about being aware of an incident between them right after it happened. Those are the types of things that the investigation could uncover.
Again, what would a two day or even two week delay matter? If there is no merit to the claims then he will be confirmed. If enough senators decide there is merit and don’t vote for him then the delay was absolutely appropriate.
And oh the irony of the GOP complaining of a delay.
cough cough Garland cough cough
CNN is reporting a hearing may be Tuesday, but Ford wants control of who gets to ask her questions and wants BK out of the room. Since that isn’t going to happen, I rather doubt the hearing will occur after all.
Right, and she has since recanted:
Perhaps the one way to complete due diligence is to track down/interview every student, teacher and administrators at both schools in the year in question. And, oh by the way, anything you say to the FBI, can be a gotcha and put you in jail, even if one has forgotten most of all the parties that they attended (due to an inebriated state).
Recommendation: refuse to talk to the FBI, or hire a lawyer specializing in FBI interviews first.
Frankly, I find it hard to believe anyone else who says they remember this party. There were parties every weekend, for years. Still are. Unless one attended just one party in all of high school, the memories of them are going to run together.
She didn’t recant. She never said she knew whether it actually happened, just that it was the topic of discussion immediately after it happened. She didn’t recant that. Big difference.
How could it be a topic of discussion if Ford claims she didn’t tell a single person and BK says it didn’t happen? It seems unlikely BK or Judge would talk about it, and we know from Ford that she didn’t