The age of an allegation weighs against its credibility, but it's not decisive. There were patterns of behavior. I'm not saying Moore is still out there molesting girls, but there's little doubt that when he was in his 30s, he took the "if there's grass on the field, then play ball" approach.
They could (and would) get somebody to lie. The problem is that it's much harder to get somebody to testify under oath and subject themselves to cross examination where their story will get torn apart and where they can face criminal prosecution and jail time their lies. That's why the "hands up, don't shoot" myth fell apart. It's one thing to lie to favorable partisan journalists to get back at the cop who shot your homie. It's quite another to face jail time for doing it.
When perpetrating a fraudulent scheme but you are so retarded/mentally challenged/developmentally disabled/full of sh-t that your motivations become crystal clear to the world: Ricki Seidman, a longtime Democrat operative, is advising Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor who recently came forward with 36-year-old sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court Nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
That's what's remarkable about this allegation. There's partisan taint all over it and it's full of holes, but people are taking it as seriously as they would if there was a videotape of him in the act. If we weren't talking about such an allegation in any other context, nobody would give it the time of day. And they want a FBI investigation? Seriously? Why? What prosecutor would bring sexual assault charges on such flimsy evidence? He'd get laughed out of court.
This could potentially be one of the best hearings of all time if the Republicans take off the gloves when questioning the "victim" who was almost "inadvertently murdered" at an "unknown place", at an "unknown time", in an "unknown year" approximately 37 years ago, and with witnesses identified by the "victim" that have stated the event never happened and refer to the "victim" as "nuts".
So Ford's classmate is backpedalling. Link. @Horn6721 , this is what I'm talking about. When rubber meets the road and stories face real scrutiny, phony ******** witnesses often fall apart.
"In my [Facebook] post, I was empowered and I was sure it probably did [happen]," Miranda told NPR. "I had no idea that I would now have to go to the specifics and defend it …… Empowered must mean "willing to lie my *** off".
Anyone who thinks they're not "dragging a $100 bill through the trailer park" even as we speak is crazy. This is part "try to drag it out to midterms" and part "let's keep hunting for anyone who will go on record and claim he did something. I suspect this has probably been going on for months, which suggests that they're not getting any takers. That actually makes me feel a lot better because as whipped into a frenzy as the base is, it's hard to imagine they can't find SOMEONE that is willing to make an unsubstantiated claim. I'm definitely struggling with this in some ways because the description of the events as she has laid it out is bad, and certainly COULD be interpreted as being even worse - "he wanted to rape her but was too drunk." I think that's the narrative that's being pushed. But the problem is that the opposite is every bit as likely - couple of drunk kids are horsing around and have completely lost the concept of when something's funny and goofy and when it's not. Basically, we tell kids that they're SUPPOSED to get drunk and fool around at pool parties, and so they do, and they find themselves in a state where they're even more incapable of making clear decisions than they already were. And we get stuff like this happening. And I have no doubt it happens a lot, whether Kavenaugh did it or not. But we seal minor records for a reason. If this incident had happened, and she had turned him in to the authorities, wouldn't his record then be sealed? He was a minor - and don't we seal those records specifically because we believe that kids do stupid stuff and need to be able to move on? We can have the conversation about whether "sexual assault" should be included in that or not, but the basic premise under which we work right now is that a teenager shouldn't have to wear his or her mistake like a brand for the rest of his or her life. I really think my first question to her would be: "What is the outcome you're trying to achieve from this? Why did you feel like it was so important? Do you believe he should be disqualified from serving based on what you accuse him of doing as a minor?"
Don't you love that line? What a load of ******* ********. (Pardon the foul language.) It's absolutely ludicrous that this was taken seriously, and frankly, this is why we have defamation laws. I'm not sure about Ford, because I think she might be mentally ill, but this alleged witness deserves to be sued.
I heard on the radio that her demands for testifying include: 1) Kavanaugh can't be in the room (she might be triggered you know, 2) she wants Kavanaugh to testify first (so he can't rebut what she says, 3) Monday is impossible, but Thursday might be OK. I think that this mostly a delaying tactic by a Democratic Party operative to push the vote until after the elections.
Interesting that Trump just sent a tweet saying if this happened it was a terrible thing. And iDr Ford or her loving parents should release copies of any official report of the horrible attack so we can learn what happened. kinda snarky but yea if it was so awful she needed " medical treatment" even tho no records of that either
As you said earlier memories change over the decades so I'm not so sure if there is a pattern. I find it hard to believe if this was supposedly so well known around the area why didn't one of Moore's opponents pick up on it before? Too many questions for me to say all of this happened.
More Ford demands: no questions from lawyers, just committee members. Since when did people appearing before a Senate Committee get to set the terms? If the Repubs agree to this nonsense, they deserve the perforated colon they're going to get.
JF I wonder, did CNN not ask these women before? Why would they want women who defended Kavanaugh? And Ford asking for thursday is so political,
The age of the allegations is a factor but not the only one. The case against Moore was infinitely stronger than those against Kavanaugh. They're not remotely comparable.
So did Ford think she could derail the nomination by just alleging ? Did she think she would never have to answer publicly?
Look, nobody has said it, but the truth is almost certain. Ford was promised a book deal, talk show interview schmoozing, and basically a buttload of money after all this is over. That CNN twit wants to know why she would put her family through all of this? Because Democrat operatives "dragged a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park", and she was the ho that took the bait.
I honestly don't see her as the biggest villain in this. (Senate Democrats and the media are the realr villains.) I can believe that somebody did something bad to her and that she's suffering from it. I can't presume that it was Judge Kavanaugh without hearing a hell of a lot stronger evidence than what we've seen.
Even if the Committee agreed to these terms, I don't believe she'd actually testify. If Kavanaugh's lawyer actually got to question her, she would get absolutely shredded. She'd find a way to make Thursday not work. Keep in mind that we've been moving the goal posts since Day 1 of this ****-show.
That is the difference to me between Liberals and Democrats; the absolute sanctimony and hypocrisy. We know for a FACT that Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick were treated as poorly as can be imagined by the Left. Yet there is no braking mechanism in their ranks when the shoe is on the other foot. And this is not to mention the Lewinsky episode which occurred while Clinton was President. This is the essence of the dissent against the accuser. It is so clear to me that it was calculated for maximum political impact but the Left has now boarded the train to prove the right are in deed full of deplorables. There are so many red herrings and strawmen arguments now being placed next to the path that it becomes very difficult to stay the course in a dignified manner if you are a Republican. And predictably, Trump is now cracking on the accuser. That is what they want.
