The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Does Judge K's Accuser Have Any Supporting Witnesses?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From WRAL, reprinting from the New York Times:

From the Anonymity of Academia to the Center of a Supreme Court Confirmation
Posted 8:40 p.m. yesterday

By Elizabeth Williamson, Rebecca R. Ruiz, Emily Steel, Grace Ashford and Steve Eder, New York Times

The text message from Christine Blasey Ford this summer worried her college best friend, Catherine Piwowarski.

Over their years of friendship — as roommates, bridesmaids and parents on opposite coasts — Dr. Blasey wanted to know, had she ever confided that she had been sexually assaulted in high school?

No, Piwowarski said she texted back, she would have remembered that, and was everything OK? Blasey didn’t want to speak in detail quite yet, her friend recalled her responding. “I don’t know why she was asking that or what it ultimately meant or didn’t mean,” Piwowarski said in an interview, but she remembers thinking that the question betrayed deep turmoil.

That was about a month before Blasey, a research psychologist, came forward with her allegation that Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, sexually assaulted her more than three decades ago when they were high school students in the Washington suburbs.

So this isn’t promising for the Democrats: the woman whom the NYT calls the accuser’s “college best friend” did not have an inkling about any sexual assault in high school, much less that the purported perp was a possible GOP Supreme Court nominee until she got a text message from her friend of 30+ years a few months ago.

So far, nobody credible has come forward to offer any supporting validation. The woman who did go on NPR to talk about how she had heard all about it back in high school immediately collapsed in a heap, probably worried about getting a subpoena.

That lack of evidence is especially striking considering how favorable the political climate is for this kind of accusation. From the same article:

Twenty-three members of Blasey’s class at Holton-Arms signed a joint letter sent to Congress this week, calling for “due consideration” of her claims. Another letter is signed by more than 1,000 alumnae, dating back to the class of 1948. When Guerry circulated the letter from the class of 1984, she found that Blasey’s story resonated deeply. “I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” she said. “When they heard Christine’s story, it struck a chord for them.”

The NYT goes on to report a salacious story involving somebody else and somebody else.

But none of these 1,000 has gone public with any dirt on Kavanaugh. The best the NYT could come up with by yesterday was:

After the alleged attack on Blasey, a male friend said, she “fell off the face of the earth socially,” failing to appear at parties and events she’d previously attended. “All I remember is after my junior year thinking, ‘Where’s Chrissy Blasey?’” he recalled.

“She was the sort of person a lot of people paid attention to — she was a leader, she was great. I was like, where did she go?”

That might be evidence of something, or it could be just like the much repeated report in Sabrina Rubin Erdely “A Rape on Campus” classic from Jackie Coakley’s roommate at UVA that Jackie got really depressed, presumably due to Haven Monahan and all the shattered glass.

This has somewhat different flavor, though, than the Jackie-Sabrina fiasco. If you listen to the recorded conversation between the two, one striking feature is how the coed is the dominant personality of the two. Erdely, the older woman, is kind of nerdish, while Coakley is brassy and brazen. She picks up on Erdely’s theories and wholeheartedly amplifies them with over the top confabulations.

Blasey-Ford doesn’t seem very similar at all.

On the other hand, the Democrats may have a witness or two stashed away. It would be pretty incompetent of them not to have something in reserve. Furthermore, that GOP operative’s scheme of blaming it on a classmate of Kavanaugh could backfire by giving somebody else an incentive to pin the blame on Kavanaugh.

 
Hide 111 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Berty says:

    85-year-old men shouldn’t be in the Senate and definitely shouldn’t be chairing Senate committees.

    • Replies: @27 year old
  2. J.Ross says: • Website

    Piwowarski = Brewer (really, son of the beermaker).
    As much as these people make me want Checkerboards Whittling, I can still make sensible and completely nonviolent contributions.

  3. TGGP says: • Website

    As Spotted Toad noted, 1983 was different enough from today to raise the probability that it did happen. But 1983 is also far enough away that it will be hard to be certain about an event that would not have been considered to be of national importance at the time.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
  4. Ibound1 says:

    She asked her best friend if she had ever told her she was assaulted? That sounds like someone who doesn’t know if she dreamed the whole thing and is looking for verification from someone. Alas it’s not there.

    In other words, she would ruin a man’s life based on a memory she isn’t even sure is real.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @SMK
    , @SMK
    , @Anonymous
  5. David says:

    We seem to be returning to the origin of the Jury (per OWH’s The Common Law), where the legal contestant who can gather the largest and most elite crowd of people willing to swear what he says is true wins the case.

  6. GW says:

    I find it unlikely that the Senate Democrats show up when the vote gets held. They will protest by being absent. Ford certainly won’t show up Monday, although I could see some grandstanding on her end next Wednesday (when the vote is to be held) with her or her lawyer having a press conference while the Republican Senate is confirming Kavanaugh. Ford knows she has no chance against the seasoned lawyers of the Republican Senate cross-examining her, and is obviously only a ploy to delay and derail K’s approval to the Supreme Court.

    Meanwhile, what’s Trump been up to? For once, the media’s incessant hysteria has turned away from the 44th president*. I don’t doubt we will get good news on the release of unredacted DOJ documents as well.

    *Grover Cleveland was one man and should thus be counted as one freakin president. Idiot historians who made him two different presidents should be stuffed into lockers.

  7. EH says:

    Rare typos today – “of them not too” in this post, “her’s” in he last. (no need to publish this comment, thanks for your constant brilliant work)

  8. Polynikes says:

    This is the most blatant attempt at character assassination on the grand stage yet. When will the R’s start doing this when the tables are turned?

  9. “Furthermore, the GOP operative’s scheme of blaming it on a classmate of Kavanaugh could backfire.”

    This is a good example of why the establishment right always loses the debate, because they immediately concede the framework of the issue to the left. Because there is an accuser, there MUST be a perpetrator. It’s just, uh, somebody else! Yeah, that’s it!

    Instead of, you know, requiring serious evidence of a crime, as opposed to yet another likely last minute political hatchet job. (Aren’t most of the GOP lawyers??)

    ““I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” she said. “When they heard Christine’s story, it struck a chord for them.””

    I have a cure for this: it’s called sex-segregated schools. Hard to get raped when there are no males around, although the fantasies involving it might increase.

  10. Daniel H says:
    @GW

    >>>although I could see some grandstanding on her end next Wednesday (when the vote is to be held) with her or her lawyer having a press conference while the Republican Senate is confirming Kavanaugh

    The vote was supposed to be held today. Everyday that the Democrats can cause delay they win a small victory. Wavering is the natural response of the Cuck. Let’s see if Kavanaugh can get to Wednesday without a cuck-collapse.

  11. Jack D says:
    @Ibound1

    More likely, at the time that she lawyered up (remember that she took a polygraph months ago, I’m sure on the advice of counsel) she was told to seek out corroborating witnesses. In 35 year-old “he said/she said” cases like this, there is a big premium put on contemporaneous witnesses. She could have been lying 35 years ago too (Jackie had contemporaneous witnesses whom she informed about her “assault” immediately) but if she could show that she told someone at the time this would boost her credibility (the Left was having orgasms of joy for the 5 minutes that lady said that she knew about the assault until she backed away). Ford might have figured that like any teenage girl she would have confided in her friends but didn’t remember which if any she told. Apparently none unless the Dems are holding secret witnesses in reserve which would not surprise me.

    • Replies: @anon
  12. GW says:
    @Polynikes

    Well, this sounds pedantic but two wrongs don’t make a right.

    Furthermore, the issue isn’t that R’s need to be hysterical and deceitful in their attempts to sabotage the D’s political objectives…rather they need to firmly defend their own agenda against these attacks and make the D’s pay for such antics. Literally forbid the likes of Feinstein and Schumer from the Senate floor if need be.

  13. Anonymous[230] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    “I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” she said. “When they heard Christine’s story, it struck a chord for them.”

    I have a cure for this: it’s called sex-segregated schools.

    Um, the school in question is girls only.

    Anyway, your highlighted passage just illustrates that the point of boosting Blasey’s flimsy accusation isn’t to sink Kavanaugh so much as to get out the pussyhat vote in the midterms.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Reg Cæsar
  14. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Both Kavanaugh and his accuser went to single sex high schools.

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
  15. @Berty

    Ridiculous

    President Trump will make a fine chair of the Senate committee to keep America great well into his 90s, introducing many great legislation for his sons to sign into law.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  16. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:

    Could that GOP operative blaming the Kavanaugh lookalike be sued for libel?

  17. anon[218] • Disclaimer says:

    Don’t be surprised if the dems have more. The more GOP say that the claim is too weak because of ‘x’, they are hosed when the dems produce ‘x’. And how hard would it be to produce another liar? Like it is difficult for someone to say they were told 35 years ago.

    • Replies: @Lowe
  18. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous

    Single sex schools not good enough. They need to put these Catholic girls in convents to keep them away from alcohol and men. Get thee to a nunnery!

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Anon
  19. JimB says:

    But, but the yearbooks!!!

    https://cultofthe1st.blogspot.com/2018/09/why-christine-blasey-fords-high-school_19.html?m=1

    Clearly there was a party and hookup culture at Holton-Arms. The contemporaneous yearbooks are evidence. There is a whole page describing the different types of booze parties. The Holton-Arms social scene is straight out of John Hughe’s Sixteen Candles or Uncle Buck. There is even a description of older girls preying on younger boys in the surrounding high schools. Christine Ford = Jackie Coakley. Period.

  20. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:

    How is her accusation any different from Larry Sinclair’s claims against Obama? In fact Sinclair’s are arguably more credible since they’re more recent and he personally made them to the press:

  21. I don’t see the point of trying to shift blame to another actual person when the accuser still hasn’t come up with an actual time and place.

    • Replies: @Arclight
  22. Jack Daniel and Jim Beam?

  23. Wilkey says:

    After the alleged attack on Blasey, a male friend said, she “fell off the face of the earth socially,” failing to appear at parties and events she’d previously attended

    Gee, it’s almost as if high school is a hormonal, emotional roller coaster during which adolescents can change abruptly, and for no apparent reason. At roughly the same age Blasey Ford “fell off the face of the earth” I started suffering from severe depression, anxiety and panic attacks. It was never because of anything that anyone did to me. I dropped out of activities I had been deeply involved in and, eventually, took up different activities entirely. Incidentally, those sort of hard-to-understand emotional difficulties often cause people to take an interest in psychology, which is exactly what Christine Blasey Ford appears to have done.

  24. @Anonymous

    …to get out the pussyhat vote in the midterms.

    College kids now vote on their late-October test batteries? Education has sunk even further than I had imagined.

  25. One potential witness who, apparently, hasn’t been heard from is a second girl who was at the party, according to Blasey’s account. Whelan indicates that she hasn’t been heard from. But has Blasey or her lawyers heard from her? It would seem very strange that if they had contacted her, and she were supporting her story, Blasey wouldn’t have brought her up from the get-go.

    I wonder how her failure to turn up and express her opinion gets explained. That seems really strange.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  26. I went to a school in that group of schools in the late 80s. Holton-Arms was nicknamed “Ho-Town” by our school. It was not a misnomer.

    Not to say that something didn’t happen to that woman. I’m sure stuff like that happened, but I do kind of resent the idea that other types of schools (i.e., non-posh) were paragons of virtue. No date-rape in DC public schools!

    My experience was, the less elite a school was, the more sluttish. The point was that the elite schools were supposed to be virtuous, and therefore it was more scandalous when they were not. And the kids had more money to blow on booze, drugs, etc., and more opportunity when rich parents were out of town.

    Besides, a guy trying to “get on” a girl while both were drunk was really common. She’s in a bathing suit at a drunken party? I went to a lot of those parties and when there were bathing suits, there was a lot of coupling. I can see how a younger girl would be traumatized by some guy trying to push the issue. But we are a far way from rape.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
    • Replies: @Ed
  27. @Polynikes

    The R’s would do it if it would be effective. They don’t have ABC, CBS, NBC and the rest to fan the flames. Though FNC may be the biggest, it’s still not big enough to pull off something of this scale, and as far as talk radio, only the choir listens to it.

  28. If there’s a potential witness lined up for Blasey, other than the other girl at the party, what would she/he be witness to?

    Blasey has said that she spoke of her incident to nobody at the time.

    So would this have to be another girl who was groped by Kavanaugh, supposedly? Unless that witness has supporting evidence for that claim — contemporaneous disclosures — how would credible would that witness seem? Would it make sense that neither one of the gropees would talk about their experiences to anybody until the present?

    • Replies: @WhereAreTheParents
  29. Simon says:

    My sense — and it makes me unhappy to say this — is that most of the country believes that if Kavanaugh is guilty as charged, he should not be confirmed. And so therefore all the debate we’ve been seeing for the past week has been about whether or not these charges seem “credible,” because if so, they are ipso facto “disqualifying.” (I just heard a podcast of National Review editors, and those sanctimonious twits all agree on that score: If Kavanaugh is guilty — which means, of course, that he’s lied about the incident — they’re convinced he should not be on the Court.)

    This strikes me as absurd. Even if the incident actually took place as Ford claims, it was a brief drunken teenage grope, for heaven’s sake, fully clothed, that for a moment may have gotten a little rough and frightened the victim. It was also a one-off, not part of a pattern of behavior (which is one reason, incidentally, to believe in Kavanaugh’s innocence). I’m sorry that the woman seems to have been traumatized by it (or has convinced herself that she was), but the incident itself is way too common among juveniles, too far in the past (which is why we have statutes of limitations), and just plain too damned trivial for the nation to agonize over now. If it really happened as the accuser claims, she should have said something about it at the time. It’s too late now — or should be.

    Would we be in the same boat if a Supreme Court nominee were proven to have uttered the word “n*****” a single time in high school? Alas, I suspect we would.

    • Agree: Coemgen
    • Replies: @Lowe
    , @Jack D
    , @David In TN
  30. @Anonymous

    That’s the problem! When they finally get in a room with actual girls,they go wild!

    • Replies: @Macon Richardson
  31. Since Blasey is now claiming that she knew this other guy well, one wonders about another possibility.

    Maybe this other guy did indeed come onto her, and grope her, etc., but at some point afterwards she interpreted this as interest in her from an older, popular, athletic guy, and she was actually flattered. So they socialized. Then maybe it didn’t work out as she hoped, and she was left with lifelong resentment over these elite boys.

    It wouldn’t do her any good to press her case against this guy, because the groping was too absurd to complain about, and the guy was only 17. But she could wreak some revenge on a good substitute, Kavanaugh.

    • Replies: @candid_observer
  32. Mildly comic.

    ‘ “I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” ‘

    Didn’t we all have traumatic experiences in high school?

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon, Logan
    • Replies: @El Dato
    , @Anon
  33. Anon7 says:

    I guess this is OT, but I’m wondering if future Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh will learn anything about Democrats, Leftists, Feminists, academics, journalists, celebrities and big media organizations during his confirmation hearing that will affect his rulings when on the court.

    Because sooner or later, something that matters to you winds up in front of the Supreme Court. I note that Clarence Thomas is not one of the Justices that became more progressive or liberal once on the court.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    , @anonymous
  34. Anon7 says:

    This alleged incident took place 35 years ago. Does anyone remember why there is a Statute of Limitations built into the law?

    1) A plaintiff with a valid cause of action should pursue it with reasonable diligence.
    2) By the time a stale claim is litigated, a defendant might have lost evidence necessary to disprove the claim.
    3) Litigation of a long-dormant claim may result in more cruelty than justice.

    I guess that’s why we now try people in the media, where the case is always fresh.

    • Agree: densa
    • Replies: @anon
  35. @GW

    Grover Cleveland was one man and should thus be counted as one freakin president.

    No. 44 men have been President, but we’ve had 45 Presidents.

    Same way Steve Sailer can be, oh, about 720 months old, even though he’s only experienced living through twelve distinct months.

  36. @candid_observer

    Another possibility is that the sequence was in the other direction.

    She knew this other guy, socialized a bit with him, maybe had a crush on him, was flattered to go to his party, then was groped by him, then became disenchanted and resentful of elite boys.

    All speculation of course.

  37. If there’s one thing to be said for Whelan’s approach using twitter, it’s that it gets some of the bugs aired out of a line of attack before the actual testimony — if there is any such.

  38. JimB says:

    Any alleged witnesses corroborating Fords story would be suspect, since they wouldn’t be found by the police and properly interrogated, they would be solicited by Fords attorney. The “witnesses” testimony would then be coached and synced up with Ford’s lame claims. But whoever the witnesses might be, they better state a time and place for the incident. Then let the testimony shredding begin.

  39. Dan Hayes says:
    @Anon7

    Anon7:

    If probably vetted (eg Justice Alito), there should never any justice who grew in office such as Souter (or even Roberts).

    Wives are an important component. It has been stated that Mrs Alito would not countenance any deviations from conservative orthodoxy.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  40. Alfa158 says:
    @candid_observer

    Perhaps the second girl hasn’t been heard from because the incident was a fabrication by a disturbed Leftist and the second girl doesn’t exist?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  41. We can not have a civilization where women are protected and coddled like children, yet their complaints and opinions are treated seriously as if they were adults.

    One or the other.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @anecdeedy
  42. @Polynikes

    Time was, I would have said something along the lines of “Dems are traitorous scum. Reps don’t deign to stoop to their level.”

    Now I would say “Dems are traitorous scum. But Reps don’t love America enough to act to oppose them. They just don’t care.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  43. The woman who did go on NPR to talk about how she had heard all about it back in high school immediately collapsed in a heap, probably worried about getting a subpoena.

    Huh huh huh huh

    Subornation of perjury

  44. El Dato says:
    @Colin Wright

    Isn’t life supposed to be like a porn movie with full-time fun, then you get paid at the end?

  45. El Dato says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    But is a grope in 1983 a sexual assault in 2018?

    And does anyone REALLY care?

    • Replies: @Linda Fox
  46. In their years in the majority over the past few decades, the Republicans have demonstrated a talent for, as I once heard aptly described in the Air Force, “F*****g up a wet dream.” I would not be surprised to see this time next year a Supreme Court with eight justices.

  47. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @GW

    Trump’s is the 45th Presidency, which have been held by 44 men.

    “President” means the holder of the office of the Presidency. It is a title of office.

    However, the same is true of Jesus. “Jesus Christ” is a conflation of a proper name, Jesus, with a title of office, the Christ. No one ever called him ‘Jesus Christ’ in his lifetime, or in Christian theology, his earthly lifetime. Christians believe that he was and is the one and only holder of that office, whereas others hold that others have held or will hold the office, I think this is true of Theosophy at least.

    The LDS Church holds that its leadership is helmed by an office called the First Presidency, which consists of the Prophet, Seer and Revelator and his two chosen associates, who are also called President as a courtesy, in the manner of the junior religion which holds that a commanding officer of a Starship (whether by rank a Captain, or a Commander or Lt. Commander: canonicity specifies actual starship COs have been full commanders, one speculates smaller ships may be commanded by LCDRs or Lieutenants) when present on another commanding officer’s vessel is addressed as Commodore, by brevet as it were.

    However, “The President of the Church” means the Prophet, Seer and Revelator, the big kahuna himself.

    UNDER THE DIRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST, the Church is led by 15 apostles, who are also regarded as prophets, seers, and revelators. The man who has been an apostle the longest is the President of the Church, and by inspiration he selects two other apostles as counselors. These three function as the First Presidency, which is the highest governing body of the Church. (For information on the other 12 apostles, see Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, which is the second-highest governing body of the Church.)

    Members of the First Presidency are special witnesses of Jesus Christ, called to teach and testify of Him throughout the world. They travel frequently, addressing and encouraging large congregations of members and interested nonmembers, as well as meeting with local leaders.

    When they are not traveling, members of the First Presidency counsel together and with other general Church leaders on matters affecting the worldwide Church, such as missionary work, temple building, spiritual and temporal welfare, and much more.

    President Henry B. Eyring Second Counselor
    President Dallin H. Oaks First Counselor
    President Russell M. Nelson President

    (Ordering mine)

    https://www.lds.org/church/leaders/first-presidency?lang=eng

  48. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve in Greensboro

    Now I would say “Dems are traitorous scum. But Reps don’t love America enough to act to oppose them. They just don’t care.”

    I would say they love praise and approbation from the sworn enemies of the American nation more than they love its survival and prosperity, certainly. McCain was someone who loved it when the press and the Democrats pretended to love him, even though on some level he was cognizant that they thought he was a fool and a traitor, which he essentially was.

  49. Ed says:
    @Joe, Averaged

    Poorer girls are always looking for a way out, to not be poor. The more ambitious ones realize they’re sexuality is a way to get material things such as bags, dresses etc. So they’ll go out with older men or prep boys to get those things and they generally don’t play hard to get.

  50. @Father O'Hara

    That’s the problem! When they finally get in a room with actual boys, they go wild!

  51. MEH 0910 says:

    Ford told friends she is uncomfortable in enclosed spaces, airplanes

    Palo Alto, California (CNN) — Christine Blasey Ford, the professor accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of having sexually assaulted her when he was in high school, has previously told friends that the alleged encounter from more than 30 years ago has had a lasting effect on her life.

    Two longtime friends of Ford’s told CNN this week that she has previously described feeling uncomfortable — even struggling — when she is in enclosed spaces without an “escape route” or more than one exit door, and suggested that this discomfort stemmed from the alleged encounter with Kavanaugh.
    ……

    Kate DeVarney, a neuroscientist who has known Ford for about 13 years, said in an interview Thursday that through their years of friendship, DeVarney knew Ford “really has a hard time being in a place where there’s no escape route.”

    This was the reason that Ford did not enjoy flying, DeVarney said — an airplane was “the ultimate closed space where you cannot get away.”

    DeVarney said she and Ford first met in 2005 when they worked at the same company, and soon discovered they had a lot of shared interests and mutual family connections. They live close to one another and see each other frequently, she said.

    Late last month, DeVarney said she reached out to Ford to get together. It was in this conversation that DeVarney said Ford confided in her for the first time about being “sexually assaulted in high school,” without sharing Kavanaugh’s name or other details about who he was. Ford told her about a letter she had sent to her congresswoman about the alleged assault.

    In that conversation, DeVarney said Ford also told her about how when Ford and her husband were remodeling their home, “she insisted that every room had to have an exit door to the outside.”

    “She did say this has affected me my entire life,” DeVarney said.

    Jim Gensheimer, who has been friends with Ford for eight years, said in a statement Tuesday that Ford has previously told him that she needs to have “more than one exit door in her bedroom to prevent her from being trapped.”

    Christine Blasey Ford’s house must be covered with doors.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    , @candid_observer
  52. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon7

    No, you’re On Topic. Right where you’re supposed to be.

    Like the “federal” elections held every November in even-numbered years and the 5-4 decrees of the Court, aren’t these nailbiting confirmation hearings part of the show that keeps people gulled into accepting that so many things in life are to be run by people in Washington?

    I’m still inclined to the notion that the Constitution was intended, at least by some of its authors and supporters, to create a limited national government. But even by the time of Marbury, those entrusted with the powers have arrogated the authority to redefine them. In my lifetime, the Court exists to deal with hot potato social issues in lieu of the invertebrate Congress, to forebear (along with the invertebrate Congress) the warmongering and other “foreign policy” waged under auspices of the President, and to dignify the Establishment’s shepherding and fleecing of the people.

    Why should a robed, unelected politician be redefining marriage? Entrusted to enforce the Constitutional limitations on the others? Sure, questions like these are posed from time to time in a dissenting Justice’s opinion, but that ends the discussion other than in the context of replacing old Justice X with middle-aged Justice Y. And even an astute group of people like Mr. Sailer’s readership accept that the way to fight tyranny is to root for Red versus Blue.

    So before investing much in the critical importance of a Justice Kavanaugh, think back on Justice Roberts and his vote to sustain the Affordable Care Act. Or reflect on how the Court has declined to vindicate free speech when presented with challenges to the Patriot Act, etc.

    Puppet show.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  53. Realist says:

    So far, nobody credible has come forward to offer any supporting validation.

    ‘We don’t need no stinking credible validation’, we have the nutless Republicans who will cave.

  54. “It would be pretty incompetent of them not to have something in reserve.”

    Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to incompetence.

  55. Arclight says:
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Agreed – seems like a poor strategy that really doesn’t help Kavanaugh, and one that could totally blow up in Whelan’s face (or anyone else who champions it). You don’t shoot down what is largely an unverifiable accusation with another one.

  56. Logan says:
    @Polynikes

    Here’s the problem.

    Conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) respect the process. That’s why we’re originalists with regard to the Constitution. You obey the rules of the game and let the chips fall where they do. IOW, in some sense, it’s not whether you win or lose, it’s how you play the game.

    Liberals’progressives do NOT respect the process. They do not consider it legitimate and believe in winning By Any Means Necessary. They say so. Ask them.

    The conservative attitude is one of at least basic respect for your political opponents. The progressive attitude is essentially one of total war on enemies. The game is not legitimate, and neither are its rules.

    The problem is when one group is “playing the game according to the rules,” but the other is fighting a war, which by definition has no rules.

  57. Lowe says:
    @anon

    I will be surprised if the Democrats have anything more substantial than what they have now. I don’t think this is following a plan. I think Blasey just called up Feinstein, or had her lawyer do it, and Feinstein felt compelled to share her story.

    As far as producing liars goes, I think people who would lie about something at these stakes are rare. Why lie and put yourself under national scrutiny? I doubt Blasey is consciously lying. I think it’s more likely she is playing up something that was not a big deal at the time, and shouldn’t be now.

  58. Lowe says:
    @Simon

    If Kavanaugh caves and plays along with the Democrats or their witnesses in any way, then I don’t want him on the court. He proves himself by maintaining his frame against their accusations. The more degrading those accusations the better, because I want him to be a embittered, hateful man by the time he gets through this process.

  59. The Z Blog says: • Website

    On the other hand, the Democrats may have a witness or two stashed away. It would be pretty incompetent of them not to have something in reserve. Furthermore, that GOP operative’s scheme of blaming it on a classmate of Kavanaugh could backfire by giving somebody else an incentive to pin the blame on Kavanaugh.

    The second gunman theory is always popular in Progressive mythology. They were sure there was a second tape after the “pussy-gate” scandal. They were sure there was a second witness after the black woman claimed Trump used the magic word. They were sure there were other tapes from the Michael Cohen safe that would get Trump impeached. Way back in the olden thymes, they searched for a second victim of Clarence Thomas only to learn there was no first victim.

    Look. This is a middle aged matron who panicked about her husband maybe trading her in for a younger model. She went off to therapy and cooked up a big drama to keep her husband’s attention. This is not exactly an unknown phenomenon. The self-help rackets have been making bank on middle aged white women for generations.

    This drama is a Type 510A, Persecuted Heroine tale, on the Aarne–Thompson classification system.

  60. MarkinLA says:
    @Alfa158

    You don’t know what millions of Soro’s dollars can produce.

  61. To this point we’ve become acquainted with Haven Monahan, the gang rape ringleader who is more real than real precisely because he is the fictional amalgam of all of the worst traits of charming frat bros and handsome lacrosse jocks.

    Are we about to see the advent of Gina Golightly, the fictitious best friend of the rape victim, who corroborates her story across the chasm of time, space and reality, who is very supportive but is slightly less hot than the victim?

  62. Linda Fox says: • Website
    @El Dato

    The grope DOESN’T count if you’re Billy C. Only if you’re Kavanaugh.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  63. @MEH 0910

    And yet, oddly, though she is a clinical psychologist — who, when they are women, see therapists at the rate of 90% (https://kspope.com/therapistas/research9.php ] — (or at least teaches clinical psychologists?), she never went to see a therapist to deal with this issue.

    Because she was groped in HS.

  64. @MEH 0910

    Daily Mail: Surfing, statistics, solar power and a beach house: Friends ask WHY Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Ford would risk losing her idyllic family life in California – unless she was telling the truth

    Shouldn’t the burden be on them to show us one example of a batty woman defaming a White Male (Republican, of course) losing anything? Can they at least show us one who hasn’t gained from doing so?

    • Agree: Rob McX
  65. @MEH 0910

    Friends ask WHY Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Ford would risk losing her idyllic family life in California – unless she was telling the truth

    Um, politics?

    Attention?

    Revenge on those elite bad boys?

  66. Bill P says:

    She didn’t cry out, make a scene or even tell her friends that night. The “he covered my mouth” part is the feeble lie – the fig leaf so to speak – that allows her and her supporters to claim that her allegation, if something resembling it actually happened, constitutes assault. But it is a transparent fabrication, because she says that she got out and said nothing.

    Maybe, and more likely in my view, Kavanaugh rejected her advances, or never noticed her in the first place. Women can and often do concoct fantasies about the objects of their desire ravishing them, and they often sound a lot like this Kavanaugh story. A common theme is that the man uses force, but the force does not rise to the level used in actual rapes. For example, “he took me in his strong arms, and looked into my eyes with a passionate gaze; I felt my ability to resist slipping away as he removed my blouse, I would have cried out to preserve my honor, but he placed his hand over my mouth” instead of “he grabbed me by my throat and threatened to kill me if I made a sound, my eyes were wide open in terror, I tried to scream but he squeezed so hard I couldn’t make a sound and it felt like my eyes would pop out of my head, then after stunning me with a blow to the face, he displayed a knife and told me to shut up and take my clothes off or he’d gut me like a fish.”

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Jonathan Mason
  67. @Lowe

    As far as producing liars goes, I think people who would lie about something at these stakes are rare. Why lie and put yourself under national scrutiny? I doubt Blasey is consciously lying. I think it’s more likely she is playing up something that was not a big deal at the time, and shouldn’t be now.

    Have you met a Pussyhatter? Plenty were youngish SJW types, but a good share were suburban women with homes and careers.

    This woman has just been treated to two years of “WOMEN ARE GONNA DIE” and probably believes it sincerely. She was in the same social orbit of Kavanaugh decades ago, and may have the power to stop him. WOULD YOU STRANGLE BABY HITLER IN HIS CRIB IF IT WOULD PREVENT THE HALL OF COST?

  68. This whole thing is so stupid it looks more and more like something DiFi thought of on her own in an attempt to help her re-election. Chuckie Schumer would have done it much better, and he has been, for him, relatively quiet. I wonder what the D polling looks like.

  69. @Linda Fox

    The grope DOESN’T count if you’re Billy C.

    You misspelled “rape”.

  70. @anonymous

    think back on Justice Roberts and his vote to sustain the Affordable Care Act.

    I think the Affordable Care Act is more to do with protecting health care providers by providing protection against patients who file for bankruptcy, than to do with affordable care.

    Being legally forced to pay hundreds of dollars a month for health insurance, then thousands in deductibles does nothing to provide affordable health care–quite the opposite, because paying the premiums leaves nothing to actually see a doctor.

    So Justice Roberts was just supporting big business as usual.

  71. SMK says: • Website
    @Ibound1

    To quote Ann Coulter: “His accuser…remembered this in a therapy session 30-plus years after the alleged incident -coincidentally, at the exact moment Kavanaugh was all over the news as Mitt Romney’s likely Supreme Court nominee…She does not remember the time and place” and “told no one for 30 years…”

    Given that her memory of the assault was “recovered” during psycho-therapy, and the “exact moment” it was “recovered,” I’m inclined to believe that she’s lying for political reasons, in the hope of derailing the judge’s nomination or, if this fails, preventing his confirmation. And if she isn’t lying, then she’s delusional, manipulated by a therapist, I assume a feminist and CSA victimologist, into believing she was the victim of an assault that never happened. We’re supposed to believe that she was so “traumatized” by this assault that the memory of it was repressed for over 30 years until it was “recovered” during psychotherapy.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Jonathan Mason
  72. @candid_observer

    Have her parents been interviewed by newsies yet?

  73. Knox says:

    Is the Therapist going to be a witness ? And claim it was a recovered memory ? Do the notes from the therapist suggest it was a “recovered” memory ? Or do the notes suggest it was just a memory she had never discussed with anyone before ?

    Either way it appears to be a hoax. She was never groped by Kavanaugh, which is why she never told a girlfriend and can’t remember where it happened or when the incident occurred.

  74. Anonymous[402] • Disclaimer says:
    @SMK

    “Memory recovery” is generally “memory rebuild from whole cloth from various elements that have nothing to do with anything whatsoever”

    Barney and Betty Hill were an American couple who claimed they were abducted by extraterrestrials in a rural portion of the state of New Hampshire from September 19 to September 20, 1961. It was the first widely publicized report of an alien abduction in the United States.

    Skeptic blogger Brian Dunning noted that the hypnosis sessions occurred over two years after the reported abductions, which afforded the couple plenty of time to discuss their encounter. Dunning concluded that the Hills’ “inventive tale from the mind of a lifelong UFO fanatic … is unsupported by any useful evidence, and is perfectly consistent with the purely natural explanation.” He added that a timeline analysis of the two Air Force radar sightings from that night in the Project Blue Book record shows that neither correlated with the Hills’ story. The Air Force concluded that both targets were probably weather balloons.

    In his 1990 article “Entirely Unpredisposed”, Martin Kottmeyer suggested that Barney’s memories revealed under hypnosis might have been influenced by an episode of the science fiction television show The Outer Limits, titled “The Bellero Shield”, which was broadcast about two weeks before Barney’s first hypnotic session. The episode featured an extraterrestrial with large eyes who says, “In all the universes, in all the unities beyond the universes, all who have eyes have eyes that speak.” The report from the regression featured a scenario that was in some respects similar to the television show.

  75. Olorin says:
    @Polynikes

    I think you’re missing the point.

    The point here is to upend the rule of law by monkeywrenching every form, system, and procedure of law. The point is to replace those already badly damaged-for-profit systems with trial by media. The point is to replace collection of evidence and sober reflection on it with hysteria.

    The point is weaponizing female emotions to win political battles and to punish all politicians and voters who align with the cooler, reasoned, male (and sober intelligent female) way of doing things.

    The point is to project that volatile, magmatic emotion onto all men with claims that all men are incipient rapists seething with horndog.

    Which is a bass-ackward way of claiming that all women are equally attractive and erasing the excellence or beauty or desirability of more excellent, beautiful, and desirable women. “You’re nothing special, they want to Pound Me Too!” Which of course speaks to a staggeringly immature view of men on the part of females…but these are immature times marked by pandemic fatherlessness. (I’m betting that Kavanaugh’s fatherly/coachly/husbandly presence is tormenting more women more deeply than his ostentible rapey horndog one. Women buy and consume a lot of rape/domination porn.)

    Logan put it very well: two types of power are in play here. The way I’d put it is more biological.

    There’s the conservative one, a highly socially/politically evolved advanced primate one where you respect your opponent enough to differ and work things out according to established and honed rules of the game by which everyone in the system self-governs.

    Then there’s the “progressive” (meaning Sorosian/Democracy Alliance) one, a hymenopteran social strategy that recognizes nothing but conforming to and protecting the hive.

    In this strategy conflicts are met with the dispatch of squadrons of stinging females who destroy anyone who threatens or harms The Queen while buzzing shrill calls to battle to anyone who will join in the sting-fest. Death by venom. (Remember, hymenopterans cause more human deaths each year than any other animal attacks.)

    Hillary Clinton was advanced through ranks of power precisely in line with these matristic hive inclinations. Giving the mob its Queen. The flood that put DJT in the Oval Office hasn’t inundated the hymenopterans. Plus they have their survival and recolonization strategies.

    Bing the term “floating fire ant colony.”

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Anon
  76. Jack D says:
    @Simon

    The Dems (and Republican cucks) are hoping to ensnare Kav in a Catch-22: If he admits the charges then he is disqualified as a rapist (and the fact that there was no rape and that it happened 35 years ago when he was a teenager does not excuse him ). But if he denies the charges then (even though it happened 35 years ago and is of no consequence) then he is lying IN THE PRESENT and is disqualified on account of lying.

    Now in a better country, one that was less #MeTooed and less politically polarized, a single teenage incident 35 years ago could be overlooked, much as the ACTUAL RAPES committed by Bill Clinton as an adult male were overlooked: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick#1978:_Her_account

    But we don’t live in that country so Kav has no choice but to deny and hope that there is no proof beyond Ford’s less than perfect memory.

    • Replies: @anon
  77. Jack D says:
    @Bill P

    he took me in his strong arms, and looked into my eyes with a passionate gaze; I felt my ability to resist slipping away as he removed my blouse

    Have you considered a career as a romance novelist?

    To be fair to Dr. Ford, her account sounds nothing like this. Remember there is another boy in the room and they appear to be jumping on each other as much as they are on her. At some point boy #2 jumps on them and they all tumble to the ground and Dr. F makes her escape. To me this sounds more like non-sexual roughhousing than attempted rape.

    Perhaps what really bothers Dr. F is that Kav (if it was Kav and if this incident even happened) treated her like “one of the guys” and didn’t see her as a romantic object at all. By retconning this incident into an attempted rape, she reaffirms her desirability, indeed irresistibility as a female. If there is one thing that females hate more than being sexually harassed, it is NOT being sexually harassed, especially after they hit the wall and become sexually invisible to men.

    • Replies: @Fred Boynton
  78. Jack D says:
    @MEH 0910

    Remember that Ford made these accusations under a promise of anonymity. Then Feinstein used the Flounder line from Animal House on her – “You f’ed up – you trusted us!”

    • Replies: @El Dato
  79. @MikeatMikedotMike

    ““I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” she said. “When they heard Christine’s story, it struck a chord for them.””

    Yeah, Kavanaugh didn’t fall madly in love with and marry any of them either.

    When you hear or read about the tens of millions of women on mental health meds and who self-medicate with wine, these are the women they’re referring to.

  80. @Jack D

    She was seeing a shrink because of marital problems. She’s a middle-aged woman who’s schoolgirl fantasies about love, romance, sex and marriage have come crashing down around her and she wants to make someone pay; as do most other women like her.

  81. @SMK

    Given that her memory of the assault was “recovered” during psycho-therapy, and the “exact moment” it was “recovered,” I’m inclined to believe that she’s lying for political reasons, in the hope of derailing the judge’s nomination

    One possibility could be that she told her husband it was Kavanaugh during the therapy to make it, or in apres-therapy, to make the point that she was desirable to top level guys, and now is unable to back away without admitting to her husband that it was all made up.

    Another possibility is that she is telling the truth, like Bruce Jenner always knew, even when he was a boy, that he was really a chicklet with a dicklet.

    • Replies: @Olorin
  82. SMK says: • Website
    @Ibound1

    Bret Kavanaugh: another victim of the “repressed/recovered memory” lunacy and charlantry, and by far the most famous. Though largely debunked as “junk-science,” it continues to blight and destroy lives, now even that of a SC nominee, albeit not to the degree that such fanaticism, combined with the “ritual sex-abuse hoax,” the “mass-molestation” day-care and inter-familial “sex-ring” prosecutions, destroyed the lives of myriads of men and women, virtually all of them innocent, convicted of crimes they not only didn’t commit but which never happened, during the mass-psychosis, hysteria, and “moral panic” over child sexual abuse, and the resultant witch-hunt and inquisition that began in the 1980′s, with McMartin, and continued into the early 1990′s until it was exposed, finally, as phantasmagorical.

  83. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    If Dr. Victim was lawyering up she screwed it up. The proper formulation of the question is: Do you remember when I told you that I had been sexually assaulted in High School? If she answers no then you follow up with … You really don’t remember telling me that I should just put it behind me and never tell anyone else about it?

    Q: January 17, this year … the day that President Clinton gave a deposition … in the Paula Jones case. … Tell us about the phone call from the president.

    CURRIE: The best that I can remember of a call, the president called, just said that he wanted to talk to me. And I said, “Fine.” He said, “Could you come in on Sunday?” And I said, “Fine.”

    And then we sort of set up an agreeable time that would work. My mother got out of the hospital on Sunday, so we made it, I think, 5:00. … He said that he had had his deposition yesterday, and they had asked several questions about Monica Lewinsky. And I was a little shocked by that or — (shrugging)

    And he said — I don’t know if he said — I think he may have said, “There are several things you may want to know,” or “There are things — ” He asked me some questions.

    He asked me about a videotape — had I ever seen the videotape. Ooh-ooh, now I can’t remember. He had a list of things that he — there were, like, three things but now I can only remember the videotape thing he asked me. If you can help me, I will — …

    The best that I can remember, sir — and it’s getting worse by the minute, seems like — “Monica was never — ” “You were always there when Monica was there. We were never really alone.” Those two stick in my mind as two statements he made. …

    Q: Did the president also make the statement: “Monica came on to me, and I never touched her, right”?

    CURRIE: Yes, that statement was made, sir.

    Q: Did the president also state to you at that time: “She wanted to have sex with me, and I can’t do that, right”?

    CURRIE: I don’t remember the “right” part coming after there but — probably without the “right.”

    Q: OK. … And did the president also say to you, “You could see and hear everything”?

    CURRIE: Correct. …

    Not only did he wish me to agree to it, but they were right. …

    Q: What do you mean they were also right?

    CURRIE: I was always there. I could always hear. And the last one — …

    I could not see and hear everything, no. …

    But if she was there, I was there. She was not — to my knowing, she didn’t come to see him or come there, and I wasn’t there.

    Q: … Sometime after your meeting with the president, you received a phone call late in the evening? …

    CURRIE: This phone call, he said, “Have you heard the latest thing that’s happened?”

    Suborning … err … preparing witnesses ain’t easy.

  84. @Bill P

    She didn’t cry out, make a scene or even tell her friends that night. The “he covered my mouth” part is the feeble lie – the fig leaf so to speak – that allows her and her supporters to claim that her allegation, if something resembling it actually happened, constitutes assault. But it is a transparent fabrication, because she says that she got out and said nothing.

    It sounds almost like an outtake from Tess of the Durbevilles, the rapey novel that scandalized Victorian England. [Plot Spoiler: Tess eventually gets her revenge on her rapist, but on the last page of the book she is hanged.]

    Why it was that upon this beautiful feminine tissue, sensitive as
    gossamer, and practically blank as snow as yet, there should have
    been traced such a coarse pattern as it was doomed to receive; why
    so often the coarse appropriates the finer thus, the wrong man the
    woman, the wrong woman the man, many thousand years of analytical
    philosophy have failed to explain to our sense of order.
    [Tess of the Durbevilles]

    ……………….

    “A little more than persuading had to do wi’ the coming o’t, I
    reckon. There were they that heard a sobbing one night last year in
    The Chase; and it mid ha’ gone hard wi’ a certain party if folks had
    come along.”

    “Well, a little more, or a little less, ’twas a thousand pities that
    it should have happened to she, of all others. But ’tis always the
    comeliest! The plain ones be as safe as churches–hey, Jenny?” The
    speaker turned to one of the group who certainly was not ill-defined
    as plain.

  85. El Dato says:
    @Jack D

    How could she have believed that an accusation of that kind could be made anonymously?

    Too much belief in the Communist Regime?

  86. Olorin says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    One possibility could be that she told her husband it was Kavanaugh during the therapy to make it, or in apres-therapy, to make the point that she was desirable to top level guys, and now is unable to back away without admitting to her husband that it was all made up.

    We were talking about this over dinner the other night. One of the not-well-appreciated roles of “cheating” in couples is as a mercenary strategy to renegotiate one’s value to (or over) one’s partner. The libidinous element isn’t necessarily biological; it can originate in the thrill of power.

    And it’s not just the “cheating” that is in play, but what the “cheating” partner chooses to tell about it, and what the other partner knows, or doesn’t know. The storytelling element, backed up by or obscured by the actual facts, known or otherwise. The fabrication of inflated traits for what is effectively a cheap/easy lay (or series of them) can be a potent way to throw one’s partner off guard and shift the power or resource base of the relationship.

    There’s nothing surprising here. But the present example certainly underscores the tendency of leftist feminists to make the state (and its agents) their husband and to use sex/allegations about sex as a way of getting power in the “marriage.”

  87. @Simon

    “It was also a one-off, not part of a pattern of a behavior (which is one reason, incidentally, to believe in Kavanaugh’s innocence).”

    Exactly. And two Democratic icons, one deceased and one living, kept up this behavior for decades, fully supported by “feminists.”

    • Replies: @HA
  88. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon7

    Does anyone remember why there is a Statute of Limitations built into the law?

    Does Kavanaugh have a good alibi for the Emmett Till murd … er … lynching? I just recovered a memory of him being there.

  89. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Occam’s razor: Didn’t happen.

  90. @27 year old

    Nonsense. He has to take up a command in the outer provinces to regain the fortune he spent winning the consulship presidency. That is the way of empires.

  91. Brutusale says:
    @Polynikes

    For Democrats, sexual peccadilloes are a feature, not a bug.

  92. J.Ross says: • Website

    GOP not completely worthless: Grassley has said look, either you agree within the next hour and a half to testify on a particular day, or we go to the vote without your testimony first thing next week.

    The Senate Judiciary Committee is postponing a high-stakes hearing set for early next week on the sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

    The committee announced on Friday that the Monday hearing — where both Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, had been invited to speak — was being called off.

    Instead, Grassley said in a statement Friday that he is giving Ford’s lawyers until 10 p.m. on Friday to respond to the GOP request for her to testify on Wednesday. If they do not, or if Ford declines to testify, Grassley said the Judiciary Committee will vote Monday on Kavanaugh’s nomination.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/407866-senate-panel-scraps-kavanaugh-hearing-set-for-monday

    • Replies: @middle aged vet . . .
  93. gunner29 says:

    The dims have Tim Russert waiting in the wings to declare BK a liar; just like he did to Scooter Libby.

    The fact he’s been dead for a decade really doesn’t matter. Not to the lefty media and the lefty part of the country.

  94. Anonymous[811] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ibound1

    The fantasist accuser’s full name was mistakenly reported as “Christine Blasey Ford.”

    The correct spelling is Christine Crazy-Broad. With proper professional titles she should be addressed, German-style, as Professor Dr. Crazy-Broad.

    It will be recalled that Crazy-Broad’s parents, Mr. and Mrs. Crazy, had some speculative property investment foreclosed on by Brett Kavanaugh’s mother who served as a judge at the time. The loss of speculative moolah must have hurt the Crazy family deeply.

    Crazy-Broad now seeking avenge the humiliation and loss one generation later would be considered not only perfectly reasonable but indeed honorable in many parts of the world, apparently including Alta California.

  95. @J.Ross

    Most of us know lots of people older than 80.

    It is always good when we see someone that age doing the right thing for no other reason than this: they think it is the right thing to do.

  96. HA says:
    @David In TN

    “And two Democratic icons, one deceased and one living, kept up this behavior for decades, fully supported by “feminists.”

    I suspect the plan was that Blasey’s accusation would trigger a rush of other accusations from all the other women that Kavanaugh raped/groped over the years (with the underlying assumption being that if he did it once, he’s likely a serial abuser like Clinton or Weinstein or Cosby or most of the others in the #MeToo hall-of-shame). I mean if he only wanted smoking hot women to clerk for him (or however the narrative is being framed), presumably it was not just to limit himself to leering at them.

    That hasn’t happened, at least not yet, which as others have noted, doesn’t help Blasey’s case.

  97. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Holton and Georgetown Prep were sex segregated schools. The kids got together outside of school. Sex segregated schools have parties events and dances in the school where members of the other sex are invited.

    The assault that never happened occurred at a party in a private home.

  98. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Even 500 years ago the Catholic convent schools had parties where they could meet nice catholic boys. Solely with the intention of arranging a virtuous catholic marriage of course

    Plus, the altar boys from the boys school across the courtyard.

    Where there’s a will there’s a way said the sailor to the mermaids. Boys will be boys and girls will love them.

  99. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright

    High school is the worst years of your life. College on the other hand is party party party while getting that oh so important piece of paper.

    • Replies: @L Woods
  100. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    Because she’s afraid of planes she plans to drive cross country to testify on Wednesday. When she gets to DC she’ll be so exhausted she’ll need a few days rest.
    The trip will be like a medieval pilgrimage. Instead of stopping to pray she’ll stop to hold press conferences aling the way. Soros will fly in pussy hat witches to demonstrate at the stops. Maybe there’ll be a triumphal caravan by the time she gets to DC.

    Outside door in every room. That’s just inviting burglars, especially during the day.
    She’ll have to stay in a suburban motel if she can’t cope with planes how can she cope with elevators in a motel. Maybe she can stay with the Obamas.

  101. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Olorin

    Reading your post I can understand why women hate men. Your post is enough to make me want to join NOW.

    Another celibate old codger virgin who hates women

  102. “It would be pretty incompetent of them not to have something in reserve.”

    Why? They didn’t have backup re: Anita Hill v. Clarence Thomas. In many ways, this is becoming Anita Hill Redux, with NPR’s Nina Totenberg (again!) covering it.

    Just as in 1991/92, the bigger picture wasn’t really about stopping Thomas from reaching the Supreme Court, it was about the Democrats takeover of the White House, the bigger picture is for the Dems to shore up their base (women) and take back Congress this election.

    Turning out to be not much more complicated than that.

    But this is clearly Anita Hill redux.

  103. Svigor says:

    After the alleged attack on Blasey, a male friend said, she “fell off the face of the earth socially,” failing to appear at parties and events she’d previously attended. “All I remember is after my junior year thinking, ‘Where’s Chrissy Blasey?’” he recalled.

    Maybe she blew a dozen guys at the party and when she sobered up had enough dignity to withdraw from social life.

  104. I have a running bet with myself that the country will become so sick of feminists / women throwing around false rape / sexual assault / DV charges around and just pitching a fit in general that their next Democratic Presidential candidate will have be a minority because they will need to use fake racism charges due to diminishing returns of the fake sexual ones.

    Motivating people can be difficult because if you use too much pressure or too many incentives, you burn out your audience. It is one of the reasons communism failed. If they could have continued to push people, either through inspiration or fear, they could have build the socialist dream. Instead, everyone became cynical and lost faith.

    I suspect that the feminists are causing very real and permanent damage to the organized women’s movement to the point where only the true believers will care about it. The rest of us will be glad when the counter movement comes and Roe v. Wade is undone if for no other reason that we are hoping to watch women like Blasey Ford and her Lesbian-Jewish man hating attorney fall on their ugly faces.

  105. Anonymous[527] • Disclaimer says:

    There you go again Steve, assuming that facts, logic, and reality will actually make leftists change their views and behaviors.

  106. Svigor says:

    Steve whimmed my speculation that Ford is a turboslut, but apparently, she is:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=ford+dewey+beach

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.