When Christine Blasey Ford testified last week before the Judiciary Committee, America witnessed a haunted woman recounting a devastating trauma. But putting aside Ford’s emotional performance and focusing instead on the professor’s testimony reveals numerous inconsistencies in her narrative that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.
As a sex-crimes prosecutor, Republican questioner Rachel Mitchell is well-positioned to “know it when she sees it.” But rather than see Ford as a victim of sexual abuse by Kavanaugh, Mitchell saw her as a witness lacking in credibility. And this conclusion comes from an expert who knows that there are many reasons victims delay reporting sexual abuse. Mitchell also recognized that victims may legitimately not remember certain details related to an attack.
But the problem for Ford is not that she doesn’t remember everything: It is that everything she remembers changes at her convenience.
Or we could talk about Brett’s change in personality.
She owes this country an apology for making these allegations up.
It makes it difficult to believe real victims like Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick, Mary Jo K, etc.
Liberals are supporting perversion of the truth on so many levels on this issue.
Kevin, did you spot Brett “making up” anything in his testimony?
jjf,
Brett was not making smear allegations, bearing false witness against anyone.
So the level of scrutiny is different.
Did you hear Kavanaugh make any statements about the conspiracy of people who were opposed to him?
Do you think he fabricated definitions of “bouf” and “Devil’s Triangle” and “FFFF” and “Ralph Club”?
The Senate has all sorts of leeway when it comes to their advice and consent. A Senator can merely say “I don’t like the cut of his jib” and that’s sufficient scrutiny.
It shouldn’t be quite so difficult for Dr. Ford to recount an experience she claims was seared into her memory and traumatized her for life. Just stick to the script, Professor. Better yet, say no more at all. Exit stage left, take a Hawaiian vacation, and leave the rest of the circus to the professional political animals.
Her original mid 80’s timeline actually fits a lot better when you apply it to Gorsuch. He graduated from Georgetown prep in 1985.
Jjf,
When abortion supporters have to resort to that to smear Kavanaugh, you liberals have nothing.
Do you false witness, character destroying, libs ever stop to think the many perverts and disgusting abusers in Congress will never survive 1% of scrutiny you gave to poor judge Kavanaugh?
I thought Brett was an abortion supporter. If he can’t tell the truth about his high school yearbook, I’m supposed to believe he’s telling the truth about everything else? There’s plenty of other things to worry about. He’s decidedly partisan, and said so. No impartial balls and strikes here, right? And Six figures of sports tickets resold to his friends? $1.2M home on a ~$200K salary and $90K in debt?
Known misogynist John Foust assumes Estes Kavanaugh’s place is in the home and is incapable of her own career.
Looks like the Democrats might not only fail at stopping the Kavanaugh nomination, but they’ve unintentionally provided the catalyst needed to prompt the pro-Trumpers, never-Trumpers, and GOPe to finally all pull in the same direction… at least for a little while. I wonder what their hair will be on fire about next week.
Fortunately there are some Senators who will vote “no” for good reasons.
Well, we know that Tammy will vote “no” because she was told to; she certainly doesn’t have time to study the issues (and probably wouldn’t understand them without color pictures in the book, anyway.)
Paul makes the point that Kavanaugh’s wife’s income may actually play a part in his cash-flow rather neatly, but we should also mention that equity in the house also plays a part in same. But maybe that’s a bit esoteric for Foust, eh?
Finally: calling Roe ‘settled law’ is going to be irrelevant when Kavanaugh & Co. begin to write decisions which acknowledge the existence of the 9th and 10th Amendments–which they will do.
If only they would’ve examined his finances, and then we’d all have answers.
OMG, Dad! You can’t talk about states’ rights and rights retained by the people in front of lefties. Stick to boobs and baseball tickets so they can participate.
Sorry, Merlin. It does seem that their attention-span doesn’t allow for any sort of depth discussion, come to think of it.
I look forward to any verified details anyone can provide! No 9th and 10th needed.
JJF,
If Kavanaugh is pro abortion, what are you liberals upset about. He should get a “thattaboy” like Clinton did for rape and assault.
If he is not guilty of being conservative on abortion, what is all the fuss about from liberals?
Jiffy heaves: Do you think he fabricated definitions of “bouf” and “Devil’s Triangle” and “FFFF” and “Ralph Club”?
Do you?
Dad29 suggests that Kavanaugh is prepped to change Roe. I’d heard he’d appeased the pro-abortion crowd by saying “settled law.” You think he intends to mislead?
As for the definitions, yes, I do think he outright fabricated new definitions because he didn’t want to say what he knew to be true. Nice, huh?
Jiffy upchucks: “As for the definitions, yes, I do think he outright fabricated new definitions….”
And how are you certain those terms don’t mean exactly what Kavanaugh said they meant to him?
Who said that he would “change Roe”?
I said that he’s going to take Amendments # 9 and 10 seriously. There’s a difference, Jiffy.
MjM: Jiffy knows all. He is Carnac. You just THINK it was Johnny Carson.
@Daddio. Interesting reading here :
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/10/04/letters-devils-triangle-just-drinking-game-not-sex-act/
And yesterday we learned that Ford hung out with her other BFF, a retired FBI agent, during the days she wrote the Finklestein letter.
Btw, we played a version of Devil’s Triangle in H.S., too. Ten+ years before Kananaugh & friends think they invented it.
MjM, I am aware that language can change, and that teens enjoy developing their own terminology. So how can we determine what words like “FFFF” and “bouf” meant to Kavanaugh? We can use his own writings at the time, like the letter about the beach condo, and the words in the yearbook. We can ask his peers, as they are still alive. We could ask other kids who were teens at the same time, like me.
We can look at a term like “Devil’s Triangle” and know what people meant by that, and we do not find that it was a drinking game “like Quarters” because then we could just call it Quarters.
Kavanaugh didn’t want to speak the truth. He thought he would get away with it. Looks like he might!
He could’ve just said “I was a teen in the early 80s and we drank before it was legal and we laughed about sex and although some of us hadn’t actually had sex yet we joked about it like we had. I was a doofus but I got better.” But he chose a different path, didn’t he?
Jjf,
Why does he even have to explain that?
Ted Kennedy left a woman dead in pond and liberals are like “nothing to see here”.
If every Liberal was quizzed like this about their youth, they would nearly all be in jail.
Is that a hyper-standard you want to raise?
I’m game.
Because “three” is identical to “four” in Left-o-Math.
I think the Senate can ask any sort of question they want. It’s not a trial. They haven’t gone down this avenue with every candidate, only the ones where sexual harassment and assault have come up. Yeah, Ted got away with that because of his white and rich privilege, didn’t he? Kavanaugh himself was hepped up about the Clenis.
Well, Dad29, I’ll leave it to you why Brett said it wasn’t a sex act but was like the game of Quarters.
I hope they keep asking your questions, jjf. That blue wave will turn into nothing more than a fart in the air conditioning if the Dems keep acting like children. They’re imploding faster than ever in history, and just in time for the the mid-term elections.
Was this white privilege, John?
http://lawyeronaleash.com/the-not-suspended-laywer-of-the-month-for-december-2009/
Again, you’re going to need to sit this one out.
Jiffy franks:”I am aware that language can change…”
Your awareness is irrelevant. Answer the question; how are you certain those terms do not mean to Kavanaugh exactly what he says they do?
Jiffy toots: “We can look at a term like “Devil’s Triangle” and know what people meant by that, and we do not find that it was a drinking game…”
Who is “we”? And when did you first hear that term used as a sex reference, it being so well known as you imply?
Jiffy worts: “We can ask his peers, as they are still alive. “
Even if they were dead we would still know. How? By using the same yearbook that the great detective Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) used to make an ass of himself, where you will find…
“Devil’s Triangle ( founder of the name)” – Bernard McCarthy
“Lost in Devil’s Triangle” – Juan Carlos del Real
“Devil’s Triangle “ – Rolando Goco
“Devil’s Triangle “ – Richard Schoeb, Jr.
“Devil’s Triangle “ – Christopher Garrrett
“Devil’s Triangle “ – Phillip Merkle.
“Devil’s Triangle “ – Paul Murray
“Squee you are such an idiot! FFFFFFFFF” – Bernard McCarthy
“FFFFFairfffffield…… Easy, Squee, easy, easy” – Thomas Kane
“FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!” – Mathew Quinn
“FFFFreshman beach week” – Delancey Davis
“FFFFFF Aaah Boy” – Rolando Goco
“FFFFFFFF ah boy” – Christopher Garrett
So, Jiffy, , please explain:
1) How, exactly, does one lose during Devil’s Triangle sex?
2) How does Creepy Porn Lawyer Avenatti’s definition of FFFFFF, which you believe is correct, square with the different citations above?
Please be specific with your answers.
Was it white privilege that resulted in a slap on the wrist despite blatant perjury, John Foust?
http://www.noethics.net/News/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5419:attorney-colleen-locke-of-jefferson-wi-perjurer-repeat-offender&catid=181:wisconsin-attorney-misfits&Itemid=100
You will sit this out.
Well, here’s someone’s item-by-item reference to the yearbook. We can stick to something simple: Why did Kavanaugh claim that it was legal for him to be drinking? Why not just say “We were underage drinkers.”
Jiffy cuts the cheese: “Well, here’s someone’s…
And we can all see you’ve refused to actually answer any of the questions posed to you. That suit of cowardice fits you nicely.
Jiffy poofs: “Why did Kavanaugh claim that it was legal for him to be drinking?”
Last chance: Please cite Kavanaugh’s quote were he explicitly stated “it was legal for him to be drinking”.
You’re wasting your time MjM… this poster, like LeRoy Duh North, never answer questions honestly, and never stay on topic. He’s already shifted, and that’s because the very article he quotes details why “Devils Triangle” is probably not the sexual activity he so desires it to be. Maybe he should try Craigslist?
Here’s a Time article on his drinking age.
Did I miss something?
Jiffy ass chats: “Did I miss something?”
Well, duh. The part where Kavanaugh says HE is legal to drink. Where is it?
Ah, I see, it depends on what “is” is. Brett’s a senior, seniors are legal, but he didn’t say he was legal.
Jiffy trouser talks: Ah, I see,
Well, no, it is rather obvious you don’t see anything past your warted nose. Did you even read the article you yourself cited?
In the fall/winter/spring of 1982-83 seniors were legal in Maryland; all those born up to 11:59:59pm June 30, 1964. Can you figure out why or do I hafta call in 1st-grade tutor for you?
And everyone who was 18 at anytime in 1982 was legal in D.C..
And what year was Brett a senior?
jjf has been quiet for a bit now… I wonder if he’s protesting Anthony Weiner’s early release (no pun intended).
Surely those women protesting the past week are now protesting this, right?
@Jason; licking wounds.
… And I have a feeling you did intend.
Best meme seen: “Wiener-Holder, 2020” :D
Jason, jump right in, tell me what’s wrong about the Time story above.
Hey jjf, did you hear that Stormy’s and Swetnick’s lawer has challenged Trump Jr to a “charity MMA” fight? How many people challenged either Sasha or Malia in the past 10 years.
Is MjM right? Have you been licking something?
The MMA fight sounds ridiculous and/or a joke, even if for charity, if you ask me, but Donald Trump Jr. is in his forties, no? Not a pre-teen as Obama’s daughters were.
But I bet you can think of a few crude things that people said about any of Obama’s family, no?
>Not a pre-teen as Obama’s daughters were.
So pre-birth is ok to terminate, and after-teen is ok to insult and attack. The off-limits range is Day 1 to approximately Day 6570? Very interesting standard you liberals have… and by interesting I mean biased and sophomoric.
Jason, were you sentient during the Obama years? Tell me where the standards of criticism have been. How would you like people to behave, and will you discourage poor behavior no matter where you see it?
I always do jjf, which explains why I’m wasting my time talking to you.