Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was sexually assaulted while swimming in a lake as a teenager, with my best friend not 10 feet away from me as it happened. I got away from the boy who was doing it without drawing any attention to what happened, then or ever. I didn’t tell my friend what happened out of fear of the incident blowing up, people finding out, and finding myself in the middle of an unforgiving rumor mill that NEVER was a good thing for a girl in the 80s. I have absolutely no recollection of anything else from that day 30 years ago. No car rides, nothing. Maybe my friend thought it was weird at the time that I chose what seemed like a random moment to stop hanging out and having fun in the lake, but that kind of mundane incident (me getting out of the lake while everyone was having fun) is not typically something that sticks with people for 30 years. She might have no memory at all of that day at the lake, and that would in no way be weird or abnormal.

I know the person who did it to me, by name. THAT is something that you don’t forget. I have no interest in drawing the incident to anyone’s attention and it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t even remember it. But if he were a SCOTUS pick I would definitely consider coming forward. And my friend would probably honestly say that she didn’t remember that specific day in the lake; I wouldn’t want her to lie about that. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen or that I would be wrong to come forward.

This is very well put. Nothing whatsoever is implausible about Dr. Ford’s story or testimony. GOPers have their heads in the sand.

[Anonymous]

Looks like Avenatti's client Julie Swetnick will be on NBC with Kate Snow tonight. He tweeted out a photo of her being interviewed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else troubled by the fact that a PROSECUTOR is picking apart a crime victim and seemingly giving cover to an alleged perpetrator? I suppose it’s not a big deal, but it bugs me. If I were assaulted in Maricopa County next week, I’d feel especially vulnerable thinking she was the one who was supposed to get justice for me.

Prosecutors in these cases are much more caring toward the victim than say, the opposite role, which would be a criminal defense lawyer.

You have made the opposite point you intended to make. I know “prosecutor” sounds scary because it sounds like Ford was being prosecuted.....but it’s the better way to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. With this GOP running FBI, we won't get any closer to the truth re the Ford incident.
2. #1 doesn't matter vizaviz nomination, bc hes already non-confirmable, bc clearly has lied many times.
3. #2 doesn't matter bc politicians don't understand why lying is a big problem bc politicians lie almost as much as they breathe, especially these days.

Got it? OK. Go enjoy the weather.

#1 has to be a joke. The call for the FBI investigation was a delay tactic. Anyone that has undergone a background check would have told you that the FBI investigation was a waste of time because it is not the same as a criminal investigation. They are going to interview all of the people associated with the two credible allegations. Ford and Ramirez. All potential witnesses have been identified and questioned by the Senate. Most have submitted statements that if false would carry a penalty. The FBI questioning carries less weight. Unless people already identified come up with new people or somehow remember thinks differently, we are not going to get any closer to the truth. That is the challenge with decades-old allegations.

The GOP is not running the investigation. The FBI is running the investigation. There is a limited scope to the two credible assaults which is what was asked for by Dems. FBI agents are going to uncover what they can about those two allegations. They have already done extensive background checks. Everyone wanted the credible allegations investigated and that is what they are going to get.

In your infinite wisdom, I would love to hear how they are going to get closer to the truth in the Ford incident. She told no one until 12 years ago. There is literally no one that can put Kavanaugh and Ford in the same place at the same time. All people who were allegedly present do not even remember being at the gathering. Unless one of them suddenly remembers something there is no way to get any closer to the truth on Ford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about how here therapist's notes say she was assaulted in her late teens, not 15 as she claims now?

If you don't believe her you don't. There will never be proof like so so many sexual assaults. Millions believe her and millions don't.

The problem I have is the line that “We believe her because women are to believed.”

This is such a bunch of crap. I am a woman and this kind of thinking simply undermines the cases where a woman is actually assaulted. There are ample very public cases where a woman should not be believed. But, as long as we go about believing every woman who makes a claim of sexual assault or rape, the real assaults become harder to prosecute.

If she was talking to her therapist about it years ago, before this nomination, something real happened to Ford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about how here therapist's notes say she was assaulted in her late teens, not 15 as she claims now?

If you don't believe her you don't. There will never be proof like so so many sexual assaults. Millions believe her and millions don't.

What about it? Maybe the therapist wrote that after Dr Ford said that it happened “in high school”, and the therapist got the age slightly wrong. Maybe it came out of Dr Ford’s mouth that way because it’s not an important detail and she misspoke. In any case, it’s a stupid right wing talking point that you should probably scratch off your list because it makes you look like an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I referred to this article on the previous thread. It’s illuminating - all of the assertions Kavanaugh presented in his testimony dissected. And what does it reveal? It reveals his obfuscation and in several cases, lies.

Of course, Kavanaugh defenders are willing to ignore this but it should trouble all of us. We deserve a SCJ who is not just unbiased (Kavanaugh showed he is anything but) but who stands for the truth.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

It was very obvious during his testimony when he was telling the truth and when he was lying. His emotions about his kids, wife, parents, etc. were very real. His statements about his drinking and sexual innuendo in his year book were obvious lies. I think he does not remember if he jumped on CBF. I think he can honestly (in his mind) state that he never sexually assaulted anyone - because he doesn't think of what happened with CBF or the penis-in-the-face waving as sexual assault. He thinks of sexual assaulters as guy who wait in the bushes in the dark to ambush innocent ladies walking home. Bret Kavanaughs (in his mind) are good people, they love their mom and got into Yale, tutor kids in Rockville and work in soup kitchens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about how here therapist's notes say she was assaulted in her late teens, not 15 as she claims now?

If you don't believe her you don't. There will never be proof like so so many sexual assaults. Millions believe her and millions don't.

The problem I have is the line that “We believe her because women are to believed.”

This is such a bunch of crap. I am a woman and this kind of thinking simply undermines the cases where a woman is actually assaulted. There are ample very public cases where a woman should not be believed. But, as long as we go about believing every woman who makes a claim of sexual assault or rape, the real assaults become harder to prosecute.

Well I don't believe every woman because of gender. I most certainly know dishonest women. I believe this woman about this attacy as do many millions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sexually assaulted while swimming in a lake as a teenager, with my best friend not 10 feet away from me as it happened. I got away from the boy who was doing it without drawing any attention to what happened, then or ever. I didn’t tell my friend what happened out of fear of the incident blowing up, people finding out, and finding myself in the middle of an unforgiving rumor mill that NEVER was a good thing for a girl in the 80s. I have absolutely no recollection of anything else from that day 30 years ago. No car rides, nothing. Maybe my friend thought it was weird at the time that I chose what seemed like a random moment to stop hanging out and having fun in the lake, but that kind of mundane incident (me getting out of the lake while everyone was having fun) is not typically something that sticks with people for 30 years. She might have no memory at all of that day at the lake, and that would in no way be weird or abnormal.

I know the person who did it to me, by name. THAT is something that you don’t forget. I have no interest in drawing the incident to anyone’s attention and it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t even remember it. But if he were a SCOTUS pick I would definitely consider coming forward. And my friend would probably honestly say that she didn’t remember that specific day in the lake; I wouldn’t want her to lie about that. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen or that I would be wrong to come forward.

This is very well put. Nothing whatsoever is implausible about Dr. Ford’s story or testimony. GOPers have their heads in the sand.

And, I have an issue with people here, and in the media, relating THEIR personal experiences to confirm, or deny, Dr. Ford’s account.
We have read it here repeatedly - each incident is different. Just because one person has specific memories, does not mean another person does.

[Anonymous]

He can now be a good judge, citizen, b ball coach and still not a good candidate for scotus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about how here therapist's notes say she was assaulted in her late teens, not 15 as she claims now?

If you don't believe her you don't. There will never be proof like so so many sexual assaults. Millions believe her and millions don't.

The problem I have is the line that “We believe her because women are to believed.”

This is such a bunch of crap. I am a woman and this kind of thinking simply undermines the cases where a woman is actually assaulted. There are ample very public cases where a woman should not be believed. But, as long as we go about believing every woman who makes a claim of sexual assault or rape, the real assaults become harder to prosecute.

Ample? I can think of two. Contrasted with how many hundreds of thousands of sexual assaults do you suppose happen in a year?

Part of the reason that the default is to believe the woman is because for SO MANY PEOPLE even when women do everything according to your preferred schedule, they still aren’t believed. The ongoing smearing of Dr. Ford is another good example of how victims are treated. You don’t think she was assaulted. You may not be one of the people who has otherwise besmirched her, but she’s been called a liar, she’s been blamed for wearing a suit, for drinking a beer (and some say she was lying and was completely drunk), she’s been called a Democratic operative.... if you want victims to come forward, you need to believe them when they do come forward. It may be inconvenient for your politics, but she is believable.

(So is he - as an angry, entitled man who would have no problem raping someone if he wanted to).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you were almost raped/feared for your life, wouldn't you grab your girlfriend on your way out of the house especially since she would have been the ONLY girl remaining?

Maybe. Maybe not. Not everyone reacts similarly, human behavior being what it is. It's hard to know with 100% certainty what I would have done in that situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sexually assaulted while swimming in a lake as a teenager, with my best friend not 10 feet away from me as it happened. I got away from the boy who was doing it without drawing any attention to what happened, then or ever. I didn’t tell my friend what happened out of fear of the incident blowing up, people finding out, and finding myself in the middle of an unforgiving rumor mill that NEVER was a good thing for a girl in the 80s. I have absolutely no recollection of anything else from that day 30 years ago. No car rides, nothing. Maybe my friend thought it was weird at the time that I chose what seemed like a random moment to stop hanging out and having fun in the lake, but that kind of mundane incident (me getting out of the lake while everyone was having fun) is not typically something that sticks with people for 30 years. She might have no memory at all of that day at the lake, and that would in no way be weird or abnormal.

I know the person who did it to me, by name. THAT is something that you don’t forget. I have no interest in drawing the incident to anyone’s attention and it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t even remember it. But if he were a SCOTUS pick I would definitely consider coming forward. And my friend would probably honestly say that she didn’t remember that specific day in the lake; I wouldn’t want her to lie about that. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen or that I would be wrong to come forward.

This is very well put. Nothing whatsoever is implausible about Dr. Ford’s story or testimony. GOPers have their heads in the sand.

And, I have an issue with people here, and in the media, relating THEIR personal experiences to confirm, or deny, Dr. Ford’s account.
We have read it here repeatedly - each incident is different. Just because one person has specific memories, does not mean another person does.

But the experience of having very clear memories of dangerous and shocking events in ones life, even from many years past, is incredibly common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's about as believable that Ford wouldn't remember how she got home from the party or discuss it with her bff who was there as it is that Devil's Triangle referred to a drinking game or Renante Alumni were young men who were showing their respect towards a female friend.

Wrong. Just because *you* have not been in her shoes and *may* not react the same way, does not mean that her reaction was in any way inconceivable.

Many, many women on this thread (myself included) have been assaulted, and reacted *exactly the same way* she did.

I have been assaulted 3x. I remember exactly who did it, and the details of all the encounters (apart from a portion of one in which I was drugged), but details of where, when, what happened before and after, etc. are all lost to time.

Yup. 1990 or 1991. I remember what I was wearing exactly and time of day, etc. I do know around the time of the year it was because it was right before a trip I know I took. But I do not remember the exact date, who I called, etc. Her story strikes me as very plausible....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the Mitchell memo. No one is asking for charges to be brought. No one is contending that she met the reasonable doubt standard.

The report just makes me more sympathetic to Ford. She is being criticized and torn apart and now a prosecutor has torn through and prepared a report for nothing. And there is no report on Kavanaugh. And we all saw his performance and know where the inconsistencies are. Not to mention his conduct.

How bizarre.

She's not being torn apart for nothing. She makes some claims that stretch all plausibility.

Words have meaning, bub.

How many dozen women ON THIS SITE have said that something very similar to what Dr Ford describes happened to them? So it doesn’t stretch all plausibility in the slightest. You’re just determined not to believe her.

It stretches plausibility that she ran out of the house, somehow got home seven miles away, but conveniently doesn't remember how she got home. It stretches plausibility that she didn't have a conversation with her lifelong best friend who was supposedly at the party with her as to why she suddenly left early and how she managed to get home.

Consider yourself lucky that is it stretches credulity for you. Know what that tells me? It has never happened to you. The other 1/4 of us know and understand exactly. Listen when people talk to you.

So no one remembers driving a girl who would have been extremely upset and shaken, seven miles back to her house? Christine and her BFF didn't discuss why she suddenly left the party or how she got home? How is it plausible that her friend didn't ask her how she got home when she couldn't drive, and she would have had to find another way home than how she would presumably have gotten there?

I was sexually assaulted while swimming in a lake as a teenager, with my best friend not 10 feet away from me as it happened. I got away from the boy who was doing it without drawing any attention to what happened, then or ever. I didn’t tell my friend what happened out of fear of the incident blowing up, people finding out, and finding myself in the middle of an unforgiving rumor mill that NEVER was a good thing for a girl in the 80s. I have absolutely no recollection of anything else from that day 30 years ago. No car rides, nothing. Maybe my friend thought it was weird at the time that I chose what seemed like a random moment to stop hanging out and having fun in the lake, but that kind of mundane incident (me getting out of the lake while everyone was having fun) is not typically something that sticks with people for 30 years. She might have no memory at all of that day at the lake, and that would in no way be weird or abnormal.

I know the person who did it to me, by name. THAT is something that you don’t forget. I have no interest in drawing the incident to anyone’s attention and it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t even remember it. But if he were a SCOTUS pick I would definitely consider coming forward. And my friend would probably honestly say that she didn’t remember that specific day in the lake; I wouldn’t want her to lie about that. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen or that I would be wrong to come forward.

It is very difficult to conclude that something happened without some corroboration. If your friend remembered being at the lake with all people present that would certainly help. Without that, it becomes one person's word against another. Unfortunately, the Duke case and the UVA case have taught us that not all claims are true. Your last line is correct but how should people act on it without any other corroboration?

I don't like Kavanaugh as a justice. I don't think he is a good pick. I don't know if what Ford says actually happened or not. I do wish that Feinstein had not sat on the allegations until the end of the process. There is no excuse for it. Ford reached out when he was being considered. He would have been dropped at the beginning of the process. That is what is so frustrating to me.