Republicans want a Potemkin hearing for Christine Blasey Ford

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What would hold up in criminal court is pretty irrelevant, since this isn't criminal court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What criminal court?

My standards for a Supreme Court Justice are higher than "it's not quite bad enough to be perjury" and "it's not quite bad enough to first degree sexual assault".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What would hold up in criminal court is pretty irrelevant, since this isn't criminal court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What criminal court?

My standards for a Supreme Court Justice are higher than "it's not quite bad enough to be perjury" and "it's not quite bad enough to first degree sexual assault".

How can anyone be publicly ruined, be they a dog walker or a S.C. Justice, with such a dearth of proof. Ludicrous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You want the FBI — the FBI — to investigate whether a couple drunk minors fell on another drunk minor at a party in Bethesda like 40 years ago? And you think we can’t possibly confirm a Supreme Court justice without this critical information? No, just no.

Are you saying it was an accident?

Maybe it was. Maybe they accidentally fell on her. Or maybe they just bumped into her at a party. Or maybe they were never even at a party with her at all.

Or maybe they pinned her to a bed on purpose.

Maybe they groped her and tried to pull off her clothes.

Maybe they covered her mouth while she tried to scream?

Maybe they tried to rape her?


We don't know what happened. That's the point of having trained investigators (the FBI) identify and interview witnesses and examine other evidence. That's what investigators do. They investigate.

If there's credible evidence that Kavanaugh and his friend accidentally fell on Blasy -- or no credible evidence to support her claim -- then this is a non-issue.

If there's credible evidence to show Kavanaugh assaulted and/or attempted to rape her, then I'd say Kavanaugh is not an appropriate person to serve on the Supreme Court. Do you disagree?

Either way, let's find out . . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want the FBI — the FBI — to investigate whether a couple drunk minors fell on another drunk minor at a party in Bethesda like 40 years ago? And you think we can’t possibly confirm a Supreme Court justice without this critical information? No, just no.

The FBI should investigate or Kavanaugh could just withdraw his nomination so the Republicans can put forth someone who doesn't have this controversy. Easy peasy.

The idiot left will try to character assassinate anyone to protect this dumb swing seat. Frankly that this is the worst they could dig up says great things about his character.

The idiot right started this whole witch hunt with their "character counts" movement.

I don’t care who started it. And frankly Democrats started the Supreme Court nonsense with Bork. In any event I’ll vote for who I think will end it.

Yea.. that was way after the Rs started it. You may not care, but the Repubs do. You watch, they will apply the "moral standards" to a Dem nominee if that should ever arise.

It's the hypocrisy that I'm pointing out. They started it, they can end it by applying their moral standards equally starting with Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What criminal court?

My standards for a Supreme Court Justice are higher than "it's not quite bad enough to be perjury" and "it's not quite bad enough to first degree sexual assault".

How can anyone be publicly ruined, be they a dog walker or a S.C. Justice, with such a dearth of proof. Ludicrous

Very few men are "publicly ruined" from sexual assault allegations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey everyone, I yelled at a kid in middle school and pushed him into a wall. This was like a 2 minute incident. If I’m up for Senate confirmation in the future, let’s get the FBI to look into that because maybe it’s assault and battery!!!!

F*ck you.

And if a man came out now and said Kavanaugh beat him up outside a bar when he was 20, everyone would want it investigated to at the very least, go away.

If a man claimed that 30 years ago Kavanaugh stole 10K from him, everyone would want it investigated. It wouldn't even be a QUESTION. Even if Kavanaugh denied it.

No, they wouldn’t. They’d be like why didn’t you report that the statute of limitations has passed and no one would care.

Not true. There could be reasons why people wouldn't have reported it at the time.

People would care, and it would be investigated and quickly wrapped up if it was thought to be unfounded.

I wouldn’t care but I guess you’re just a sensitive soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want the FBI — the FBI — to investigate whether a couple drunk minors fell on another drunk minor at a party in Bethesda like 40 years ago? And you think we can’t possibly confirm a Supreme Court justice without this critical information? No, just no.

The FBI should investigate or Kavanaugh could just withdraw his nomination so the Republicans can put forth someone who doesn't have this controversy. Easy peasy.

The idiot left will try to character assassinate anyone to protect this dumb swing seat. Frankly that this is the worst they could dig up says great things about his character.

The idiot right started this whole witch hunt with their "character counts" movement.

I don’t care who started it. And frankly Democrats started the Supreme Court nonsense with Bork. In any event I’ll vote for who I think will end it.

Yea.. that was way after the Rs started it. You may not care, but the Repubs do. You watch, they will apply the "moral standards" to a Dem nominee if that should ever arise.

It's the hypocrisy that I'm pointing out. They started it, they can end it by applying their moral standards equally starting with Kavanaugh.

Well they didn’t morally assassinate Garland. They used the congressional rules to thwart him. Frankly I have more respect for that approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She doesn’t remember the YEAR in which this alleged attempted rape occurred.

Ridiculous.

Then she can't do math because she does remember she was 15....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What criminal court?

My standards for a Supreme Court Justice are higher than "it's not quite bad enough to be perjury" and "it's not quite bad enough to first degree sexual assault".

How can anyone be publicly ruined, be they a dog walker or a S.C. Justice, with such a dearth of proof. Ludicrous

Very few men are "publicly ruined" from sexual assault allegations.

None are. We will see how things go for Cosby and Weinstein.

[Anonymous]

Returning to the OP . . . .

jsteele wrote:

At a time when Russian influence in US politics is a matter of great controversy, it is perhaps fitting that one construction of Russia is about to be displayed on Capitol Hill. The Republican refusal to allow an independent investigation into Christine Blasey Ford's allegations of sexual assault by Supreme Court justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh and their "take it or leave it" offer to appear at a Monday hearing with no other witnesses beyond herself and Judge Kavanaugh are an attempt to stage a Potemkin hearing.

I agree 100%. I haven't seen anyone else frame the situation quite this way. I hope you're trying to get this published and circulated more broadly.

[Anonymous]

How hard is it to understand the only reason the FBI was involved with the Anita Hill case is because it was a case involving sexual harassment in a Federal workplace involving 2 people that worked for the Federal Government? They had jurisdiction and Anita made a formal complaint. Where is the formal complaint here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You keep removing posts that point to the ridiculous fact she can’t remember actual details of her assault. Insane

Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home. She told no one about it at the time and the issue came to the forefront during a couples therapy session six years ago. Her therapist’s notes never mention Kavanaugh and actually mention four boys involved, although she says there were only two.

And?

Try to get a conviction in criminal court with that hot mess.

What criminal court?

My standards for a Supreme Court Justice are higher than "it's not quite bad enough to be perjury" and "it's not quite bad enough to first degree sexual assault".

How can anyone be publicly ruined, be they a dog walker or a S.C. Justice, with such a dearth of proof. Ludicrous

So bring on the FBI investigation!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How hard is it to understand the only reason the FBI was involved with the Anita Hill case is because it was a case involving sexual harassment in a Federal workplace involving 2 people that worked for the Federal Government? They had jurisdiction and Anita made a formal complaint. Where is the formal complaint here?

Because that's wrong. The only reason the FBI was involved was because it was a judicial nomination.