Republicans want a Potemkin hearing for Christine Blasey Ford

[Anonymous]

I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

Neither do I. The yearbook shows Blasey in her Halloween costume with her girlfriends. No drinks in hand. It appears that they are at a Halloween event, but for all we know it's on-campus.

This yearbook is a nothing burger other than proving that all of the rich kid schools were awash in boozing.

That said, Maryland only raised their alcohol age to 21 in 1982. So there was definitely a strong drinking culture among adolescents and teens in the 1970s and early 80s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accuser’s HS yearbook has leaked:

http://cultofthe1st.blogspot.com/2018/09/why-christine-blasey-fords-high-school_19.html

Scribe 84 is the yearbook for her senior year. Her name was Christine Blasey in high school, often referred to as “Chrissy”. In the image below, Blasey is pictured at a Halloween party in her junior year. The caption on the right says:

“Lastly one cannot fail to mention the climax of the junior social scene, the party. Striving to extend our educational experience beyond the confines of the classroom, we played such intellectually stimulating games as Quarters, Mexican Dice and everyone’s favorite, Pass-Out, which usually resulted from the aforementioned two.”

Scribe 82, pg. 260, shows racy images, including three minors dressed provocatively as Playboy bunnies. The caption states:

“Beach week culminated the year for those of us lucky enough to go. With school and our minds in temporary recess, we were able to release all those troubling inhibitions of the past year. While dancing in the middle of coastal Highway, Ann [redacted last name] and friends picked up some men who passed out in their apartment…”

UHHHH, attacking girls for the choice of attire is not the argument you want to make. Regardless of what she decided to wear, boys/men are responsible for their actions.

So, you think pictures of random Holton girls are somehow relevant? Weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

I guess the same relevance his yearbook has, people have been referencing his, why not hers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you Jeff. It seems like GOP wants a Potemkin testimony. At the same time I read this Opinion piece from Jennifer Rubi today

Republicans, be forewarned: Kavanaugh’s accuser has options

She lists several points on how Dr. Ford can testify and turn this hearing to GOP nightmare. Then she states...

In short, Ford can use the hearing to put the senators, who have behaved shabbily, on defense.

Ford has another option: Hold a news conference with her own experts and make the case directly to the American people. She can sit down for an interview with a respected TV journalist. She can say whatever she wants, make certain that experts are heard and even recount the much more extensive investigative efforts undertaken when Hill stepped forward. To make her case to the American people and convince them that she is sincere, honest and credible, Ford doesn’t need the Senate.

I actually like her to do that today or tomorrow and then go for the hearing on Monday.

There is another aspect which is bothering me. Why would GOP not want a full fledged investigation? This charge is fairly serious. If it were true, someone who might have evidence can blackmail Kavanaugh once he is confirmed. Why would GOP want to have a blackmailable SCJ?

Me too. Her lawyer is not new to this party. While Senate Republicans and their staff have been staying stupid stuff all week trying to get a positive news cycle or two, I suspect Professor Ford's team has been planning the best way to present her experience to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

I guess the same relevance his yearbook has, people have been referencing his, why not hers?

His was specific to his personal page and Judge's personal page, mostly because both referred to excessive drinking and were not respectful to women. You attached a whole bunch of random pages half crossed-out that don't even relate to her specifically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Anita Hill allegation was way less distant in time and more detailed than this one. The fact that this involved a bunch of rich high schoolers partying makes me care even less. A federal workplace has much clearer rules of interpersonal conduct.

You need a code of conduct not to pull someone into a bedroom, climb on top, grind against her, fondle her, and cover her mouth? Holy crap dude. You need help.

I’m actually a woman. Have you been to parties with drunk teenagers? It’s not a genteel gathering. People act ridiculous, both women and men. They flirt, they grind, whatever. I have no idea what happened and, based on what’s been said so far, I don’t care. #enoughalready

Ford said what happened. No one cares about you, and of course you don't know what happened, but you erroneously think you're cute with your sad little hashtags. #getalife

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

I guess the same relevance his yearbook has, people have been referencing his, why not hers?

His was specific to his personal page and Judge's personal page, mostly because both referred to excessive drinking and were not respectful to women. You attached a whole bunch of random pages half crossed-out that don't even relate to her specifically.

+1. Ford didn’t pick those quotes out for herself, the yearbook editors and staff write the captions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Anita Hill allegation was way less distant in time and more detailed than this one. The fact that this involved a bunch of rich high schoolers partying makes me care even less. A federal workplace has much clearer rules of interpersonal conduct.

You need a code of conduct not to pull someone into a bedroom, climb on top, grind against her, fondle her, and cover her mouth? Holy crap dude. You need help.

I’m actually a woman. Have you been to parties with drunk teenagers? It’s not a genteel gathering. People act ridiculous, both women and men. They flirt, they grind, whatever. I have no idea what happened and, based on what’s been said so far, I don’t care. #enoughalready

Ford said what happened. No one cares about you, and of course you don't know what happened, but you erroneously think you're cute with your sad little hashtags. #getalife

“Ford said what happened.” To you, I guess that sounds like, “God said, let there be light!” It’s pathetic. It’s a mockery of feminism. I’m not obligated to believe accusations. As an adult human being with the ability to reason, I’m in fact obligated to be skeptical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

I guess the same relevance his yearbook has, people have been referencing his, why not hers?

His was specific to his personal page and Judge's personal page, mostly because both referred to excessive drinking and were not respectful to women. You attached a whole bunch of random pages half crossed-out that don't even relate to her specifically.

+1. Ford didn’t pick those quotes out for herself, the yearbook editors and staff write the captions.

Yes, former high school copy editor here. We write the captions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what relevance her yearbook page has to her having a sexual assault against her.

I guess the same relevance his yearbook has, people have been referencing his, why not hers?

His was specific to his personal page and Judge's personal page, mostly because both referred to excessive drinking and were not respectful to women. You attached a whole bunch of random pages half crossed-out that don't even relate to her specifically.

+1. Ford didn’t pick those quotes out for herself, the yearbook editors and staff write the captions.

Yes, former high school copy editor here. We write the captions.

All the better, the captions are probably more accurate that way!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Anita Hill allegation was way less distant in time and more detailed than this one. The fact that this involved a bunch of rich high schoolers partying makes me care even less. A federal workplace has much clearer rules of interpersonal conduct.

You need a code of conduct not to pull someone into a bedroom, climb on top, grind against her, fondle her, and cover her mouth? Holy crap dude. You need help.

I’m actually a woman. Have you been to parties with drunk teenagers? It’s not a genteel gathering. People act ridiculous, both women and men. They flirt, they grind, whatever. I have no idea what happened and, based on what’s been said so far, I don’t care. #enoughalready

Ford said what happened. No one cares about you, and of course you don't know what happened, but you erroneously think you're cute with your sad little hashtags. #getalife

“Ford said what happened.” To you, I guess that sounds like, “God said, let there be light!” It’s pathetic. It’s a mockery of feminism. I’m not obligated to believe accusations. As an adult human being with the ability to reason, I’m in fact obligated to be skeptical.

Your skepticism only turns on her, not on him. How intellectually dishonest. And the only person potentially deifying anyone here is you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Anita Hill allegation was way less distant in time and more detailed than this one. The fact that this involved a bunch of rich high schoolers partying makes me care even less. A federal workplace has much clearer rules of interpersonal conduct.

You need a code of conduct not to pull someone into a bedroom, climb on top, grind against her, fondle her, and cover her mouth? Holy crap dude. You need help.

I’m actually a woman. Have you been to parties with drunk teenagers? It’s not a genteel gathering. People act ridiculous, both women and men. They flirt, they grind, whatever. I have no idea what happened and, based on what’s been said so far, I don’t care. #enoughalready

Ford said what happened. No one cares about you, and of course you don't know what happened, but you erroneously think you're cute with your sad little hashtags. #getalife

“Ford said what happened.” To you, I guess that sounds like, “God said, let there be light!” It’s pathetic. It’s a mockery of feminism. I’m not obligated to believe accusations. As an adult human being with the ability to reason, I’m in fact obligated to be skeptical.

I think as a human you could agree that either version or somewhere in between happened and that trained investigators would be the best to figure it out. Cold cases are handled every day in this county.

Don't you want to have an impartial 3rd party investigate what happened?

[Anonymous]

But, in lieu of that, their goal is a hearing in which Republican committee members listen respectfully to Ford's tale, utter some sympathetic sounds, and then lament that no evidence exists to support her version of events. But, of course, the Republicans are doing all in their power to ensure that no evidence exists.

There is no real “evidence” that exists. Republicans don’t need to “ensure” that. It is her account vs. his account.
She claims to have said something about this in a couples therapy sessions. Fine. Present the therapist’s notes. Have her tell what she discussed. Have her relate what her claims are.
You don’t need a slew of people to vouch for her. She tells her side, he tells his.

And, it’s disturbing to read about someone who is a “victim” and someone who is a “perpetrator” or “assaulter.” None of this has been proven. And, it probably never will be.
These two people have names. Use them.

[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.

Bork? We are bringing up BORK, who had an up and down vote (as opposed to, say, Merrick Garland)?

Let's not forget that SCOTUS lost all legitimacy with Bush v. Gore and Alito's eye rolling during SOTU. But, by all means, bring up a situation where a nominee was vetted and voted upon. No one, not Bork, Kav, or anyone else, is entitled to be on SCOTUS just b/c their nominated.