The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Ex-Boyfriend of Blasey Ford Comes Forward with a Few Minor Scandals
🔊 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
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 Fox News:

Christine Blasey Ford ex-boyfriend says she helped friend prep for potential polygraph; Grassley sounds alarm
By Gregg Re, John Roberts | Fox News

In a letter released Tuesday and obtained by Fox News, an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, seemingly contradicts her testimony under oath last week that she had never helped anyone prepare for a polygraph examination.

The former boyfriend, whose name was redacted, also said Ford neither mentioned Kavanaugh nor said she was a victim of sexual misconduct during the time they were dating from about 1992 to 1998. He said he saw Ford helping a woman he believed was her “life-long best friend” prepare for a potential polygraph test. He added that the woman had been interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s office.

He also claimed Ford never voiced any fear of flying (even while aboard a propeller plane) and seemingly had no problem living in a small, 500 sq. ft. apartment with one door — apparently contradicting her claims that she could not testify promptly in D.C. because she felt uncomfortable traveling on planes, as well as her suggestion that her memories of Kavanuagh’s alleged assault prompted her to feel unsafe living in a closed space or one without a second front door.

He also claims she used his credit card to charge $600 after he’d broken up with her for her infidelity and she didn’t admit until he said he’d have to call in fraud investigators.

Obviously, this undermines her claim to be a paragon of credibility who can be trusted without much corroborating evidence.

But … this isn’t really all that much bad stuff.

I’m kind of surprised by how little bad stuff has emerged so far about either Judge Kavanaugh or Dr. Blasey Ford.

Hide 273 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. donut says:

    For some reason this whole thing brings to mind the scene in ‘Confederacy of Dunces” where Ignatius is in the cinema with his bags of popcorn imagining the actors tongues “darting over each others capped and rotting teeth” .

  2. I’m kind of surprised by how little bad stuff has emerged so far about either Judge Kavanaugh or Dr. Blasey Ford.

    As they say in academia, the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small.

  3. JimB says:

    As decorated Vietnam Veteran Sen. Dick Blumenthal said to Judge Kavanaugh, false in one thing; false in everything.

  4. I mean, it seems pretty bad to me. Lying about the polygraph and her fear of flying makes it more obvious that this was mostly a delay tactic. She wasn’t some poor bewildered creepishly baby-voiced creature unaware of how polygraphs work or afraid to fly cross country. You don’t just forget that you knew the intricacies of polygraph testing, especially I assume if you’re a psychologist. It proves this was all calculated. She lied about her fear of flying because she wanted to draw this out. She lied about her knowledge of polygraphs because she didn’t want her one source of evidence to seem shaky. This whole circus was contingent on her “credibility”. She now literally has no leg to stand on. How could this not be seen as anything but bad for her?

  5. Yeah. It’s pretty bad.

  6. Take a look at how confidently and emphatically she denies that she ever gave anyone tips or advice on how to pass a polygraph. She knows she’s lying, and does it with all the sincerity in the world, cool as a cucumber, even knowing that she can be subjected to a charge of perjury.

    This is one skillful sociopath.

    • Replies: @GW
    , @The Wild Geese Howard
  7. istevefan says:

    But … this isn’t really all that much bad stuff.

    If you think perjury isn’t really all that bad, then I suppose you are correct.

  8. Achilles says:

    The friend who was coached is a former long-time FBI special agent and member of the DC bar, Monica McLean. Her bar membership address is Rehoboth Beach DE, so she may go back quite a ways with Professor Doctor Chrissie. (Was she helping Chrissie in late July and early August when the Professor Doctor was in Delaware sending a letter to Feinstein and arranging attorneys?)

    But if McLean tries to protect the Professor Doctor and is caught lying, she is putting a LOT at risk. Such as her law license.

    One can imagine enough here to support probable cause to investigate Professor Doctor Chrissie, which would open up investigative tools to pull on a number of threads.

    But would there be any willingness by Chris Wray and Rod Rosenstein to pursue a serious investigation of Professor Doctor Chrissie with a view to false statements and perhaps conspiracy charges?

    Or maybe Kavanaugh goes on the court and the DC Establishment calls no harm, no foul?

    • Replies: @AnonAnon
    , @ChrisZ
    , @Svigor
  9. GW says:

    Exactly. Ford looks horrible here.

  10. Mike P. says:

    If this is true it suggests that Ford either lied under oath or has a bad memory. Both raise questions about her allegation against Kav.

    • Replies: @El Dato
  11. Ibound1 says:

    If this holds up she’s toast, not because she lied
    about the polygraph and not because she stole $600 and not because she cheated on her boyfriend

    But because she falsely accused a man of rape

    Once she has been shown to be a liar, then people will be free to not believe her and then the enormity of what she tried to do to Judge K will dawn on everyone.

    Bearing false witness in an accusation of rape is a crime of Biblical proportions. (Literally).

  12. “I’m kind of surprised by how little bad stuff has emerged so far about either Judge Kavanaugh or Dr. Blasey Ford.”
    Dr. Ford seems to have never gotten over trying too hard to be a party girl in high school.
    Judge Kavanaugh seems to have pretty well gotten over some excessive drinking in high school and college.
    I suspect evil people are using one to destroy the other to save themselves.

  13. OT: These days, Garrison Keillor can’t even show his ugly mug at a Vermont book festival:

    His series of sneering editorials about Trump supporters in WaPo during the 2016 election makes this sweet justice, even though it’s a sign of our hysterical times.

    Pity, I’m at the age where Prairie Home Companion was starting to grow on me…

    • Replies: @trelane
  14. “I witnessed Dr. Ford help McLean prepare for a potential polygraph exam,” [redacted] said. “Dr. Ford explained in detail what to expect, how polygraphs worked, and helped McLean become familiar and less nervous about the exam.”


    Mitchell: “Have you ever had discussions with anyone, beside your attorneys, on how to take a polygraph?”
    Ford: “Never”
    Mitchell: “And I don’t just mean countermeasures, but I mean just any sort of tips, or anything like that.”
    Ford: “No”
    Mitchell: “[H]ave you ever given tips or advice to somebody who was looking to take a polygraph test?”
    Ford: “Never”

    LOL, and the left wants Kavanaugh for perjury because he misrepresented the drinking age. Truly thought it’d take the FBI report being leaked before they folded, but there’s not much choice with this witness now.

    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
  15. I’m wondering if the Dems are happy with the results of the FBI investigation they wanted so damn much.

    You can be sure that the FBI talked to the ex-boyfriend and examined relevant evidence of his claims. No doubt the Judiciary Committee has already been made aware of some of it — whence the letter from Grassley.

    No doubt as well the Dems are aware of this angle. And no doubt they’ve communicated the blow up to their friends in the media.

    It’s why we’re talking about ice and puke and Trump’s taxes.

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

    after he’d broken up with her for her infidelity

    This would be consistent with the 54~64 figure.

  17. GW says:

    Watch the Bombards Body Language on her. She has obvious tells that she is lying.

  18. Tiny Duck says:

    Fox News isn’t reputable and should be shut down tucker Carlson is a racist

    Kavarape is unfit and will never be a judge

    Read the comments

    The People are against you

  19. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:

    Both Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh had the privilege of growing up in a pre-social media time, a time where radical feminists and race hustlers hadn’t firmly ensconced themselves in the power structures of every major corporation and university, a time where it wasn’t standard practice for cops and prosecutors and judges to ruthlessly fuck people over for minor transgressions. They also grew up in a time where being a likable, all-American boy with a decent IQ was enough to get into Yale and where you could spend a decade or so “finding yourself” and still end up with multiple professorships and a house in Palo Alto. You won’t find much dirt on them because they sowed their oats in a time where heaping dirt on people wasn’t the norm. Bliss was it in that dawn to be American; but to be white and rich was very heaven!

    • Agree: Clyde, Autochthon
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    , @TTSSYF
  20. Cucking her man and then putting debt on his credit card is a capital offense.

    Plus she’s a phony sack of Silly Putty.

    But Brett drinks beer and once threw ice at somebody in college, so he has to go.

    Sounds pretty Jeff Flakey to me.

  21. 22pp22 says:

    It depends on why she coached her friend on how to pass a polygraph. If it was for a serious criminal matter, then it is a very big deal indeed; professional misconduct and obstruction of justice.

  22. J.Ross says: • Website

    I think the key is that she flat-out said she did not do this, consistently through multiple phrasings and conditions.

  23. @Ibound1

    If this holds up, nothing will happen to her. Same way nothing happened to Hillary, Brennan, Clapper, Strozk, Page, McCabe, ad nauseum. Blasey is just another footsoldier in the good fight.

  24. @22pp22

    What it means is 1) She committed perjury at the hearing when she answered that she had never advised anyone about polygraph tests, 2) She potentially knows how to pass lie detector tests, so the one she took is possibly false evidence knowingly submitted by her, 3) She not only spoke but acted like she knew nothing about lie detectors, thus confirming that she is an actress putting on a phony affect. Combined it makes one’s intuition scream that her whole presence in this sad chapter is a construction and that she is a fraud.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  25. L Woods says:

    Not in our perverse society. I’d be shocked if anything happens to her.

    • Agree: Kylie
  26. Yeah, sure is crazy why in this day and age why no one is willing to submit themselves to the Star Chamber that would ensue if they said anything about Ford.

    Steve’s Boomer Bubble has to be so thick by now its bulletproof.

  27. L Woodsj says:

    Steve’s nice guy affect is quite misplaced here.

  28. Mr. Anon says:

    But … this isn’t really all that much bad stuff.

    Sure it is. It challenges her (much vaunted) “credibility”.

    If these allegations are true:

    1.) She lied about giving tips on passing a polygraph test. Meaning, she actually has spent some time thinking about how to beat the polygraph. Meaning, she might have lied on her own polygraph.

    2.) She had no problem flying, going back years.

    3.) She had no problem living in a studio apartment with one door.

    If all this is true, then her story to date is probably all BS.

  29. black sea says:
    @Tiny Duck

    Kavarape . . . any relation to Covfefe?

    “The People are against you”

    You use the word “people” rather loosely.

  30. @Tiny Duck

    Seriously, dude: The Daily Show? Ask us what the other 98% of the country thinks. Sure, at least 43% will concur, but TDS followers is a seriously biased sample.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  31. Lagertha says:

    Before I go to bed, because I must – lack of sleep! yeah, Ford is so a lying liar, so duh. I heard this story long before tonight – I have heard she is mixed up with CIA/FBI and they are all insane and imploding bc Trump has them by the gonads. Shit is happening. That is why every past Democrat of any cred (C, O, Mrs. O, B, etc.), is out talking to anyone with a mic, now – any platform that is still stupid enough to take them on.

  32. Anonymous[423] • Disclaimer says:

    The latest info on 4chan, which accurately broke the news regarding the second front door and lodgers in Blasey Ford’s home, is that she had the second door installed and took in young male lodgers to pursue romantic liaisons and to host gangbang parties. Word of this got out to her husband and community, and she made up a story about how she was sexually assaulted by 2 boys in high school and now hosted young men and those parties in order to overcome her past trauma and fear.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  33. 22pp22 says:
    @Tiny Duck

    I know you are a sad troll, Tiny, but this time things are different. Basic freedoms are being trampled underfoot. For once, show us that you can be more than you seem to be.

  34. F0337 says:

    TD is right about one thing. The truth is irrelevant.

    What matters is whether the MSM decides it can’t ignore the story anymore.

  35. The Fords wanted to create a marriage-counseling record about Kavanaugh in order to be able to accuse him if Romney won the 2012 election and then nominated him to the Supreme Court.

    However, the Fords were concerned that the marriage-counseling record eventually might be exposed to investigators or even to the public. The Fords did not want their sexual relationship to be discussed by other people.

    Therefore the Fords concocted the argument about two front doors as a pretext for the marriage counseling. If the marriage-counseling records were ever exposed, then the records would contain mainly arguments about their house’s second front door — not arguments about their sex life.

    That’s why her lies about the second front door are very important in figuring out the plot against Kavanaugh.

    Renovation Records Undercut Ford’s Exit-Door Account

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  36. MEH 0910 says:

    Christine Blasey Ford is a compulsive liar.

  37. JimB says:

    If you think perjury isn’t really all that bad, then I suppose you are correct.

    What’s a little perjury if it means destroying the reputation and life of a great legal scholar?

  38. Daniel H says:

    >>They also grew up in a time where being a likable, all-American boy with a decent IQ was enough to get into Yale …

    No. In 1985 competition to get into Yale was, then as is now, intensely competitive. One needed a hellava’ lot more than a decent IQ to get into Yale in 1985.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. JimB says:

    The $600 credit card fraud thing makes me wonder if Ford was shoplifting at the Safeway when she ran into Mark Judge bagging groceries back in 1982.

  40. @Anonymous

    Well, sure, of course, how could this story not be true?

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  41. @The Alarmist

    But those are 1985 speeding tickets, right? Is there anything juicier than speeding?

    • Replies: @FPD72
    , @The Alarmist
  42. El Dato says:
    @Mike P.

    That would be some seriously bad memory (also a complete lack of professionalism as a Professor Doctor, has she ever heard of diaries? what’s that, she doesn’t keep one???), the kind that needs a brain scan or an inquiry into the use of possibly illegal, possibly recreational psychoactive substances.

  43. @22pp22

    For her it’s shit-deep serious. And by ‘her’ it means both of them.

    Christine Blasey Ford coached her friend Monica L. McLean how to pass the polygraph . . . . for a position as Assistant Attorney /Special Agent with the FBI. She got the job. McLean was there in 2000, and then with DOJ until she retired in 2016 just before Trump took office. She currently lists herself as an independent consultant. Oh heavens, you can’t write this stuff!

    Now do you understand why the Senate R-party hired Mitchell to ask questions? Rachel Mitchell is awesome, because she snuck these questions in so easily, so lightly that nobody noticed. And they knew Ford had done this all along; they must have.

  44. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar

    The stakes are high here, but they’re both well-bred.

  45. El Dato says:

    Come on man. It could have been TRUE!

    • Replies: @Clyde
  46. @22pp22

    Have no doubt that the ‘therapist’ Ford encountered was a “mommy’s therapist” who was coaching her the same way she was coaching this person to cheat on the polygraph. It is a very common tactic in the family court system for a marriage counselor or therapist to write up notes only to have them get leaked or find some way or another into divorce or custody proceedings. “I felt threatened” or ” I was so afraid he was going to…”. The false accusations only have to be credible enough to win temporary custody of the children or get dad ‘temporarily’ kicked out of the house because it then becomes much easier to make things permanent once that has been accomplished. If the guy ends up in jail that is a bonus but it is not the main purpose of the fake allegations.

    9 times out of 10 it is women who use this tactic and there is a veritable cottage industry of lawyers, experts, and court appointed psychologists that vie for the business. A good divorce attorney knows who the local mommy advocates are and my guess if you asked an attorney in Palo Also who Ford’s therapist was she (a feminist) would ping the radar. Having been down this road myself, the similarities between the Kavanaugh hearings and the type of shit desperate women will do during a divorce are only too obvious.

  47. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:
    @Daniel H

    It was harder to get into than the University of Maryland, sure; all things are relative. But not terribly difficult compared to now.

    -21.8% admit rate in 1984 (rate typically runs in the 6-7% range these days)
    -Median SAT score of 1340 (medians are usually in the low 1500s now)

    I can’t find any data on non-Asian minority enrollment but I’d be shocked if it wasn’t higher then as compared to now. For a white kid to get into Yale today my sense is that he has to be either an exceptionally high-performing nerd, incredibly well connected (son/daughter of famous person or professor), a varsity athlete or a “wildcard” — eccentric East Coast Jewish personality that appeals to an admissions officer’s sensibilities. The “well rounded” student/athlete/partier type represented by Kavanaugh would probably be lucky to end up in the lower Ivies today.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Alec Leamas
    , @res
  48. El Dato says:
    @The Alarmist

    How is self-hypnosis even a thing?

    Is this like a self-flashing EEPROM?

    Sounds very quack science!

    Christine Ford has not turned over her therapist’s notes to the Senate regarding her suppressed memories about Judge Kavanaugh abusing her decades earlier.

    Whenever I read this, I picture someone locking the girl up in the basement and sexually assaulting her for weeks. In 2018, “abusing her decades earlier” is a rough grope at a 80s beer party. Am I too old school?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Travis
  49. Anonymous[264] • Disclaimer says:

    The SATs were more difficult back in the 1980s, so a 1340 score would be equivalent to a higher score today, although probably not in the low 1500s.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  50. J.Ross says: • Website

    There is a quality called “suggestibility,” which is not the same thing as intelligence or gullibility. An intelligent person can be suggestible. Aldous Huxley (in his Brave New World Revisited address) talked about both government research and “quit smoking LP” businesses finding that society is divided into quintiles, with a fifth unhypnotizably skeptical, another just waiting for the finger snap, and three categories inbetween. That was in ’68 and extensive research has been done since then.
    This “Christine Ford of the CIA” stuff never goes anywhere, but her name does appear on a research paper (with others) that was doing CIA-type manipulation and suggestion.

  51. Achilles says:

    These goings-on among the boyfriend, Professor Doctor Chrissie and Monica McLean appear to have taken place in Los Angeles in the 1990s.

    Chrissie has a masters from Pepperdine in 1991 and a PhD from USC in 1996. Boyfriend said she moved to Hawaii around 1998. Not clear what her job was between 1996 and 1998, but it must have been in Los Angeles.

    In 2000 per an affidavit McLean held the title of an Associate Division Counsel on the legal side in the FBI Los Angeles field office. It’s possible she started in the LA field office in July 1992, and it was for that job that she was coached by Chrissie on a polygraph and the two were living together, before Chrissie moved in with her boyfriend. Perhaps Monica was in law school there in LA at the time she was rooming with Chrissie.

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  52. MEH 0910 says:
    @Tiny Duck

    Kavarape is unfit and will never be a judge

    Tiny Duck, you incredible nincompoop, Judge Kavanaugh already is a judge.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  53. If what the ex says is true about the polygraph coaching, Dr. Baby Voice committed perjury. This is unlike her other questionable statements. Whether she actually fears flying is subjective. She never said that she didn’t fly. So, that just makes her a less credible witness. But if she coached someone on taking a polygraph and then testified under oath that she’d never done so, there is no question that she committed perjury.

    For obvious political reasons, she will probably get a pass. But people have gone to prison for perjury. This would be bad stuff if anyone else did it.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @The Alarmist
  54. anon[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    They say that in Stillwater too.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  55. JimB says:

    That’s what I’m thinking. Mitchell sneaked in two perjury traps, the fear of flying and the polygraph, and Ford stepped in both. Then Ford stepped in her own perjury trap by lying about the time of construction and purpose of second front door — things that could easily inferred from public records. That’s three lies — count them — three!

    So pretty much everything else is bullshit.

    • Agree: densa
    • Replies: @Cortes
    , @ic1000
  56. The Left depends, to an enormous degree, on controlling the Supreme Court to force a lot of their agenda on an unwilling public. With Kavanaugh’s appointment the Court would maintain a solid conservative majority for a decade or more (Thomas is only 70-years-old). So they tried throwing a Hail Mary to stop Kavanaugh’s appointment. Their hope was that an allegation of attempted rape would be just believable enough to stir up the women’s vote and delay an appointment until after the election.

    What they didn’t count on was how ridiculous those charges (and the accuser) would turn out to be. The likely result now is that their Hail Mary will turn into an interception. They never really appreciated how much patently bogus allegation would stir up Republicans and independents. Those allegations are so ridiculous that the media has now shifted to writing stories about some bar incident in which Kavanaugh was never charged.

    A best case scenario (unlikely but possible) for Dems this election year was picking up 4 seats: TX, TN, AZ & NV, for 53 total seats.* In the worst case scenario (also not highly likely) they could lose 7 seats: FL, IN, MO, MT, ND, WV and even NJ, for 42 total seats. Based on the latest polls they are probably now closer to the latter than the former, all because of a ridiculously unlikely attempt to stop the Kavanaugh nomination. Kinda tells you how important controlling the Court is to passing their agenda that they were willing to risk those Senate seats.

    * Three of the four states in which Republicans might lose are heavily Hispanic. Gee, those Hispanics sure are “natural Republicans,” aren’t they?

  57. AnonAnon says:

    McClean was in the Class of 1984 at Holton Arms and signed a letter of support for Ford:

    They signed that letter as Holton Arms Class of 84. Coincidentally, Monica McClean was at Southern NY until Preet and Co. got fired in 2016. Same office that raided Cohen’s. Now her best friend, CBF is going after Kavanaugh. This is dirty— Toucan_Dan (@wayfarNorCal) October 3, 2018

    • Replies: @Achilles
  58. Mr. Blank says:

    You’re forgetting to apply the Left-wing Discount Factor. It’s the opposite of the Right-wing Multiplier.

    It’s simple, really: Kavanaugh might have lied about the exact meaning of the term “boof,” even though it’s probably impossible to suss out the precise intricacies of ever-shifting teenage slang from 36 years ago, even by people who directly experienced it. Because he’s a right-wing white dude, this is a high crime deserving of 500 years in prison, at least.

    Ford told a clear lie in response to a direct question while under oath, but because she’s a liberal Democrat, and because it didn’t concern Murder, like on TV dramas, it’s not a “lie-lie,” and thus does not count. Don’t believe me? Well, get back to me when this is over, and tell me about what consequences Dr. Ford faced for perjury.

    Go ahead. I’ll wait.

  59. Achilles says:

    Whether her former FBI lawyer friend Monica in Rehoboth Beach Delaware played a role together with Professor Doctor Chrissie in planning and organizing this hit on Trump’s Supreme Court nominee needs to be thoroughly explored.

    In light of the other lies, the notion that Chrissie was sitting in her car in the parking lot of Walgreen’s trying to find a lawyer to help her smacks of yet another lie. Was she in reality spending time at Monica’s home working on this operation?

    Does former FBI lawyer Monica know former DOJ lawyer Bromwich? Were there elements of the corrupt pro-Hillary anti-Trump cabal at DOJ/FBI involved in planning this operation?

    • Replies: @AnonAnon
  60. Bubba says:

    Dick Blumenthal (Israel First – CT) earns the 5779 (it’s 2018 for all the goyim) Chutzpah Award.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  61. @The Alarmist

    If the Professor Doctor Reverend is prosecuted for perjury,pussy hats will flood the streets!

    • Replies: @South Texas Guy
  62. @hooodathunkit

    The old heads of the Republicans are showing a great deal of cunning. I didn’t know they had it in them.

    • Replies: @Difference Maker
  63. @Ibound1

    Thanks, Ibound. I agree. Be careful who you extend the privilege of signing on your credit card cause it’s not fraud unless they’re trying to use a card that’s number has been cancelled or changed.

  64. @AnonyMoose

    As I said, the left has used the courts as a rolling constitutional convention for the past half decade.

    • Replies: @Carbon blob
  65. AnonAnon says:

    Does former FBI lawyer Monica know former DOJ lawyer Bromwich? Were there elements of the corrupt pro-Hillary anti-Trump cabal at DOJ/FBI involved in planning this operation?

    Twitter/the internet seems to be working on developing the connections. This guy is the most active tonight:

    Likely reason no response from FBI and frustration from Bromwich is the multiple CONFLICTS with relationships between Blasey-Ford and members of DOJ and FBI.Wray/Boente need to handle conflicts.Bromwich wanted conflicts to his advantage. "Curse you villain" !!Makes sense.— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) October 3, 2018

    • Replies: @Ibound1
  66. @Jack Hanson

    I suppose they count more than a few lawyers among them, after all

  67. @Mr. Blank

    Well, get back to me when this is over, and tell me about what consequences Dr. Ford faced for perjury.

    Agreed. Throughout this seemingly never-ending farce, I’ve read and listened to commentary from a range of Republican politicians, righty pundits, and Christian leaders, and only a bare few have even raised the possibility that CBF is what seems obvious: a liar.

    The Republican counter-narrative — i.e. that CBF really was sexually assaulted and is deeply traumatized, but that she’s somehow IDing the wrong man — shows just how far the perceived power of victimhood has penetrated American culture.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @ic1000
  68. Hibernian says:

    I got a 1430 in 1971, 690 verbal, 740 mathematical.

  69. Cortes says:

    And the purely fortuitous release of the ex-boyfriend’s letter snaps the trap shut on both Ford and her handlers.


    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
  70. Hibernian says:

    They’d have to prove the coaching. The ex-boyfriend says no animus but (a) He’s an ex-boyfriend (b) She cheated on him (c) Then there’s the credit card fraud business (d) Why if there’s no animus did he come forward? (Unless they found him and he was just a good citizen who answered truthfully.)

    Monica would take the 5th. I think perjury is hard to prove and that’s at least part of the reason there are so few perjury prosecutions.

    • Replies: @Federalist
    , @Svigor
    , @anon
  71. Hibernian says:

    The Vietnam lie was repeated, not a one off, and at least sometimes before veterans groups.

    • Replies: @Bubba
  72. @Steve Sailer

    And yet… would you be surprised, really?

  73. Danindc says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    Agreed. Steve, she actively got off her ass to try and ruin this man’s life with her lies. She is evil.

  74. Anon[237] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    I once ran a website and a competitor in the same niche heavily promoted a third-party self-hypnosis CD set on his site. I thought it cheapened the site and didn’t seek to promote it myself, but in talking to my competitor, he was making quite a bit of money on it. So I swallowed my pride and asked the publisher for a copy to “review” — the competitor told me that, as in radio, personal endorsement really makes the advertising more effective.

    I put the thing in my computer’s CD drive and put on some headphones and leaned back in my reclining chair. The audio was simply some woman telling you to relax and relax your toes and your such and such, and it went on, and it eventually got into the meat of the subject, which was just reciting facts and the like. Nothing subliminal or weird or cryptic. But I got really, really relaxed. I mean, super relaxed.

    A deliveryman came to the door, and I heard the bell, but I was semi-paralized. I was not asleep at all, just really relaxed. I couldn’t pull myself out of it fast enough to get to the door, and I felt like I had been woken up from a sleep at the worst time.

    It was quite a weird experience. I repeated it a couple of times. I don’t know what this sort of wakeful relaxation is, and I don’t know how or whether it can be exploited to influencing you to do things, but it seemed that there was something different happening. Maybe this state is what is at the core of various meditation practices. It’s weird enough and different enough that people can overlay whatever interpretation they want on it and people believe it.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  75. @Reg Cæsar

    Inasmuch as the nine SC judges can effectively legislate at will to the most powerful government on earth, the stakes are pretty high.

    The reason so little bad stuff has emerged about Kavanaugh is that he has worked to live an upstanding life.

    The reason that so little bad stuff has emerged about Ford is that the media are actively avoiding looking.

  76. TTSSYF says:

    You lost me after the first sentence.

  77. TTSSYF says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    That’s exactly what I thought when I heard about her marriage counseling that occurred in 2012, after Romney had mentioned Kavanaugh as a possible Supreme Court nominee. How convenient.

    I think Mitchell was effective and, as others have noted, laid several good perjury traps for CBF, but I wish she had asked more about the “two front doors” — how and when constructed, whether the space cordoned off from the main house had amenities such as small kitchen, bathroom, space for sleeping and whether it had ever been rented out by the Blasey-Fords..

    • Replies: @MB
  78. Bubba says:

    I know, but Blumenthal’s comment to Judge Cavanaugh went far beyond what a normal human being with an ounce of conscience would say (I think 99% of normal human beings would not have uttered a word).

    Blumenthal is a real sociopath and no different than the well-documented, true Senatorial sociopath, burning-in-hell Ted Kennedy in that respect.

    • Replies: @3g4me
  79. @Senator Brundlefly

    I think Mr. Sailer was being ironic.

    But I won’t be. Ms. Crazy-Ford is being progressively revealed as a dingbat and a liar. The longer this goes on, the worse it looks for our enemies.

  80. @candid_observer

    This is one skillful sociopath

    Nah, just your typical narcissistic/BPD Western female in the Current Year.

  81. Twinkie says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    To be fair, the two are not mutually exclusive. She could be both a highly partisan, inveterate liar AND someone who was sexually assaulted by a group of boys or men. Women who use drugs, drink a lot, and sleep around are more likely to be taken advantage of than good girls who avoid trouble.

    Of course, even if she were assaulted by someone, it doesn’t justify destroying someone else’s life. It certaintly shouldn’t get one a free pass for perjury.

  82. @Hibernian

    Good points. If what the boyfriend said is true is a big if. Also, committing perjury and proving it beyond a reasonable doubt are two different things.

    I was disputing the original post in saying “this isn’t all that much bad stuff.” If she committed perjury, it’s very “bad stuff.” But I suppose it could be read to mean that it isn’t much bad stuff in light of the only evidence of perjury being the statement of an ex-boyfriend.

  83. It s high time that the atrociously naive Americans finally rid themselves of the ghastly German mind-set of authority and title worshiping.

    This rediculous adulation of “Doktor” titles and perfesser titles, held in most part by abject fools, nut-cases and downright idiots, this sickening German-mindset of worshiping of such blatent fools simply because they were inducted into the meaningless, showered with Benefits” world-wide club of “Herr- Doktors” causes more strife than could be entered into tomes of depiction.

    Having resided in several german university towns in which these nit-wits ( Herr Doktors ) parade around celebrating and congratulating themselves 24/7 and being adored by the hapless peasants : ” Guten Tag Herr Doktor”, wie geht es Ihnen Herr Doktor, was a revelation of insanity non-plus.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US army vet, and pro Jazz performer.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @passive-aggressivist
  84. @Almost Missouri


    Missouri, Buffalo, Dad and Jack Hanson could be your guest hosts Mr. Sailer if you ever decided to take a real vacation.

  85. @istevefan

    Yes, I’d say this was all incredibly bad. For one example, I believe in most states you can go to prison for stealing $600.

  86. @Jack Hanson

    Almost 50 years, really — Griggs v. Duke Power (which many here would argue has been the most catastrophic Supreme Court case in recent history) was decided in 1971.

  87. Art Deco says:

    Her ex’s who don’t live in Texas are witnesses you take with a grain of salt. Still it’s consistent with other information and not helpful to her.

    So far, Christopher Garrett has said very little, just a statement through his lawyer that “he has no knowledge or information relating to her claims. ” The man needs to answer 3 or 4 questions to put this to bed. If he says he never introduced her to Kavanaugh, Judge, Smyth, et al, it’s hard to see how Collins, Murkowski. and Manchin can continue to pretend to take this seriously. (Flake the Mormon will shift to fussing about Kavanaugh’s liquor consumption).

    • Replies: @miss marple
  88. ChrisZ says:

    Achilles, it seems to me that prosecution would not only serve the cause of justice, but would also deter this kind of circus (that is, deter both false accusers and those that use them) in the future. It would also be critical personally and professionally to Kavanaugh, to clear his name and remove any shadow over his judgments.

    This is all elementary stuff. But I have total confidence that our side will put zero pressure on the justice system to pursue even a strong case against Ford (and the others). If they had the nerve to do so, then Lois Lerner would be serving hard time now. They’re just relieved to see the back end of this episode—and to feel secure that their own indiscretions were not exposed in the process.

    • Replies: @3g4me
  89. FPD72 says:
    @Steve Sailer

    The violation code is for speeding more than 15 MPH over the speed limit. In some states that is considered reckless driving. In North Carolina it is a jailable offense.

  90. @Father O'Hara

    Nope. If Kavanaugh is confirmed and she is prosecuted for perjury, the left won’t do anything about it. The left hates losers more than the right does, and the powers that be realize if they do try something, all they’ll be doing is getting more stink on themselves for the big 2020 election.

  91. Flip says:

    The fact that she never mentioned this supposed assault to her longstanding boyfriend completely undermines the story she told. She seems like a nutcase to me.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  92. Iberiano says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    Because…the point she is making is valid and literally 5 out of every 4 women are victims of such sexual assaults and women do not lie about such things, and trying to punish her, the actual victim, sends a message that hearkens back to another ugly period in our nation, and we are above that, that’s not who we are, and we are better than that.

    And you’re a sexist (and possibly racist and homophobic) for even suggesting it might be bad for her that this is all completely made up, and you probably hate women, want to force them back into the kitchen (including the one they are renting out in their furnished basement), and want to go back to the days when women were property.

    Does your mother know you feel this way about Dr. Ford, a highly educated, respected, strong independent woman?

  93. ic1000 says:

    > Then Ford stepped in her own perjury trap by lying about the time of construction and purpose of second front door — things that could easily inferred from public records.

    AFAIK Blasey Ford wasn’t asked when the second door was installed, nor did she volunteer a date. As to her claimed fear of being in a bedroom with only one exit, that’s subjective. Maybe she’ll point out that her anxiety peaked in 2007 due to thinking about that traumatic day in the early or mid 1980s (whenever it might have been), but her practical husband had convinced her to rent the space to Google interns by 2008. Would you want to be the prosecutor that had to win a perjury conviction on that basis?

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  94. @Anonymous

    Mensa accepts SAT scores before the modern “recentered” era as a proxy for an IQ test, making the median IQ circa 134.

    I don’t know how well connected to the Ivies Georgetown Prep is, but a normal bright kid would have been competing with attendees of the WASP Prep Schools like Exeter, Andover, Lawrenceville, etc. that were and remain known to be “pipelines” to the Ivies. They’re a real advantage over a comparable applicant.

  95. Svigor says:

    The poster boy for stolen valor just had to be a (((Blumenthal)))? The demographic least likely to serve; their enrollment is 1/10th their share of the population.

    Democrats don’t even have the decency to force him to step down.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  96. Svigor says:

    The rot starts at the top. Trump can tell Rosenstein to investigate the issue, and make sure he does, and fire his ass on the spot if he doesn’t.

    That’s what Chief Executive means.

  97. Svigor says:
    @The Alarmist

    Lazar Kaganovich died peacefully, in his bed, at the age of 97. The only way these people find justice is if one of them kills the other.

  98. Svigor says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Polygraph tests are inherently false evidence, which is why they’re not generally admissible in court.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  99. Svigor says:
    @The Alarmist

    TDS followers is a seriously biased sample.

    Yeah but the Merchant Minute is great.

  100. @Almost Missouri

    The reason that so little bad stuff has emerged about Ford is that the media are actively avoiding looking.

    They seemed to have called in a number of favors to scrub her public existence from the web back when she wanted to remain “anonymous,” huh?

    There is an allegation (don’t know if reliable) that her publicly available criminal records were scrubbed before her name was widely known. Sounds like a job for the Eshoo staff under the direction of Feinstein if true.

    FWIW, the FBI should have a record of any arrest in NCIC, which may or may not make it into the hands of the Senators.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
  101. @Senator Brundlefly

    She literally has no leg to stand on? I hadn’t known she was a double amputee or a paraplegic.

    Please purchase a dictionary.

  102. Svigor says:

    WTF? You come forward when you see someone being railroaded by a liar and a cheat because sense of justice. It doesn’t require animus.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  103. @ic1000

    AFAIK Blasey Ford wasn’t asked when the second door was installed, nor did she volunteer a date.

    No, but her testimony was that the therapy was needed during the course of the remodel when she demanded two doors, and the therapy in question took place in 2012 and 2013.

    It’s difficult to imagine going to marriage counseling four years after the decision about the doors had been made and maintaining that the counseling about the doors themselves. I doubt Mr. Ford would still be fighting over the second door four to five years after he lost that particular marital battle. Blasey seems like the kind who would provide a never ending source of marital discord and drama, so you’d have something else to be bickering about by 2012.

    Of course, the counseling notes and records would be probative of this, but Ford’s attorneys would require a great deal of legal wrangling to get them in spite of a clear waiver of any privacy right inhering in them (both providing them to the Bezos Blog and testifying about their content before the Committee).

    • Replies: @ic1000
  104. NickG says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    She lied about her fear of flying because she wanted to draw this out. She lied about her knowledge of polygraphs because she didn’t want her one source of evidence to seem shaky. This whole circus was contingent on her “credibility”. She now literally has no leg to stand on.

    Ah… that charming figurative use of ‘literally’.

    A Valley girl in training perhaps?

    • Replies: @Senator Brundlefly
  105. I would think that if you are a research psychologist by profession and have coached on how to pass a lie detector test, then you could be described as a professional liar, a select occupational group that includes poker players, politicians, photographers, portrait painters, palm readers, preachers, plastic surgeons, poets, porn stars, public relations officers, and police officers.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  106. ic1000 says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    As a rule of thumb, Democrat pols think further ahead than their Republican peers (evil vs. stupid). It seems likely that Sen. Schumer et al. are already doing some contingency planning along the following lines.

    As Blasey Ford’s narrative continues to deteriorate, Kavanaugh’s confirmation becomes more likely. If he gets the thumbs-up, Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas show the future. Blasey Ford reaps the financial and career benefits of her suffering for the Cause as a victim of the cishet white male patriarchy. Kavanaugh enjoys the prestige of a Justice, but never escapes the taint of beating his witchcraft rap on a technicality.

    But if Kavanaugh goes down, he could be tempted to initiate a defamation suit against Blasey Ford, or perhaps against Feinstein or her leaky staffer. He might or might not win, but the prospect of Discovery is surely engaging the attention of the clown show’s ringmasters. (This is what Duke’s administration feared in the aftermath of the Lacrosse Rape Hoax implosion.)

    Each revelation about the Summer 2018 timeline adds to the list of people to be deposed and records to be subpoenaed.

    Hey, commenter Lot — is there a way to place a PredictIt bet on an increase in deletion and shredding activity among the Judiciary Committee’s minority members and their staff?

    It would be too funny if one of the swing Senators (Collins, Manchin, etc.) were to get some back room pressure from the Progressive establishment… to vote Yes.

  107. It’s difficult to imagine going to marriage counseling four years after the decision about the doors had been made and maintaining that the counseling about the doors themselves.

    • LOL: bomag
  108. Barnard says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    From the beginning, Ford has reminded me of a more intelligent version of a woman I used to work who would lie about anything. She would lie to cover her tracks or lie about small details of her personal life that wouldn’t have mattered to any of us. Crooked Hillary is the same way, just tell a lie and move on to the next one. If people bring up one of your old lies call it a settled issue. It is disturbing. Ford she be headed to jail for perjury.

  109. Travis says:
    @El Dato

    I agree. It is ludicrous to suggest the alleged actions of Kavanaugh equate to sexual assault or sexual abuse. Teenage girls who are known to be sexually promiscuous , attending parties with boys they just met are likely to expect such behavior from drunk teenage boys. From my recollections of High School parties from 1983-1987 I witnessed many instances of groping , especially of the girls who were easy and known sluts…while many of them seemed to enjoy the attention occasionally they would slap or even punch one of the boys.
    Groping the girls who had boyfriends was much more risky , often resulting in a broken nose when the boyfriend was told. When a local kid groped my girlfriend at a party we held in the summer after we graduated High School , not only did I physically assault him , we slashed the tires on his car. He was a known groper, in fact his nickname was squeezer. Everyone among social circle then ostracized him and he was afraid to show his face at any of the parties we held after this incident.

    The recovered memory of Blasey Ford is obviously a fabrication. If she was groped by this kid , she would have told a friend. She would have recalled who drove her home. In addition her best friend would have recalled knowing these boys from Georgetown Prep, but she denies knowing any of these boys. It is outrageous that the Senate allowed her to manipulate the process, delay the hearing by deceiving the Senate about her fear of flying etc..

    • Replies: @Iberiano
    , @Rosamond Vincy
  110. ic1000 says:
    @Alec Leamas

    > It’s difficult to imagine going to marriage counseling four years after the decision about the doors had been made and maintaining that the counseling [had been] about the doors themselves.

    I thought so too, but Jack D convinced me otherwise.

    Also see his comment Imaginary dialogue in the office of the lawyer supplied to Blasey Ford by the Democrats.

  111. @Art Deco

    I’m jealous. I never managed to date a guy who could’ve thrown credit card privileges around like that or who had a card that wouldn’t have been maxed out at $600. I wonder what else he bought her or if he paid her tuition. The card would be a condensed symbol then. I did date a guy who claimed money he’d spent on me had been some sort of loan after we broke up. I paid him back as if it had been but only out of pride. Interesting, I wonder if he would’ve taken me to small claims court otherwise. It be very interesting to know that about him.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  112. @Alec Leamas

    Les autistes over at the chans are really blowing it on this case.

    You’d think this episode would be exactly the kind of catnip they find irresistible, just to prove there is nowhere to hide in the system.

  113. @hooodathunkit

    Now do you understand why the Senate R-party hired Mitchell to ask questions? Rachel Mitchell is awesome, because she snuck these questions in so easily, so lightly that nobody noticed. And they knew Ford had done this all along; they must have.

    Exactly. And this simply shows what a travest this whole process is, giving senators an opportunity to grandstand on TV. In reality there is so much going on behind the curtain that the public does not see or know.

    The extended FBI enquiry is just a PR exercise to allow certain information to be made public and given certain senators plausible deniability, or at least muddy the water, before they vote for Kavanaugh. “It was the FBI that made me do it. I am just a poor, simple Senator, and I watched Efrem Zimbalist Jr. on the TV in my trailer park, and I trust the FBI.”

    • Replies: @Jack D
  114. Anon7 says:

    Obviously, we’re all wasting our time expecting new dirt to come out. The new dirt won’t come out until Friday, or maybe Monday, as they’re getting ready to vote. The whole point of this exercise is to RESIST, remember.

    Bringing Dr. Ford forward serves two purposes:

    1) Maybe Kavanaugh won’t be confirmed
    2) Dems fire up their base a month before national elections by once again exposing the unbearable privilege of white males, their rapacious nature, etc. Dems don’t care about a few Beckys, but the plain mousy girls who never had a chance with the Chads will finally get their revenge.

    They hoped for item 1, but they were always going to get item 2.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
  115. Jack D says:

    The Dick Blumenthal standard is not really the law in most places (good thing for Vietnam War Hero Dick) – common sense tells you that a witness could be wrong about some minor detail and telling the truth about everything else and we should not be required to throw out the baby with the bathwater and disregard a witness’s entire testimony if you catch him in one mistake. But since this is the standard that Dick wanted to apply to K’s testimony, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    If you compare the relative “lies” of K and BF, BF’s seem much more intentional. She says that she can’t travel because she has a fear of flying and turns out to be a frequent traveler not just in jets but in small planes. The latter is a killer detail – a lot of people are not happy fliers but fly reluctantly anyway because they have to in order to do their jobs and have a normal life, but in my experience you could NEVER get any of those people onto a single engine prop plane unless it was for some dire emergency and even then maybe only if you tranquilized them first. Her stated reason for the 2nd door also turns out to be false and her stated lack of familiarity with the polygraph is also false. And this doesn’t even touch on the lies we can’t pin her down on – I have the feeling that her whole story about how she took the advice of beach ladies is also BS – it will turn out that her moves were carefully coordinated with and by Democrat Party operatives.

    K’s “lies” OTOH, are of a different, much more ambiguous sort, such as concerning the meaning of “boofing” – either boofing actually meant something different to him or else he is telling a white lie because it would be embarrassing to state the meaning on national television – either way it is not material to anything.

    But Blasey’s lies concern items that are much more recent and that directly contradict her testimony. I have the feeling that she is a well practiced liar who lies frequently in order to get what she wants and in order to avoid having to deal with the consequences of her prior actions.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    , @Marquandian Hero
  116. So…she’s a slut that committed credit card fraud. She also lied about the door and her “fear of flying.” Obviously we need to #believewomen!

  117. anonymous[159] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s become quite apparent that this person, Ford, is not only a reflexive liar but is somewhat sociopathic as evidenced by her history of opportunistic cheating and stealing. She’s clearly a manipulator who exploits a ‘poor victim, helpless female’ pose for her own personal benefit. She’s enjoying being the queen bee at the moment, being assisted by a coalition of dishonest people with political motives. There’s little restraint being shown here in demonizing a person who appears to be quite conventional and rather ordinary in his personal life. Kavanaugh’s drinking and otherwise acting out behavior during his school years was probably an example of someone being away from family scrutiny and so could overdo things. This is common for young people who feel the reins of control suddenly loosened. Most of the people involved seem to have little to do with the average person so it’s hard to get excited in defending K as he might just betray everyone by being merely another ‘conservative inc’ type.

  118. Jack D says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    If it is just window dressing for yes votes, why were the Democrat Senators the one pushing it?

    I really don’t think that there is a grand conspiracy between the D and R Senators. The D’s have been improvising and making this all up as they go along. Their tactics have been stall, stall, stall. Even now they are calling for more stalling. What is their goal in stalling? When there is life there is hope – once K gets on the court he is there forever – the die is cast. But until then, there is always the chance for a miracle – another witness (one that is actually credible) comes forward with dirt on K. Trump is indicted. The Dems take control of the Senate. Flake changes his mind. Anything. As long as the football is up in the air there is still hope.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    , @anon
  119. Seneca44 says:

    I wonder if this is the end of the Russia nonsense. It certainly has disappeared from the front pages of the MSM rags. The true believers will always think that the Rooskies tipped the election to Trump; how else could a huckster like that beat the deified first woman to become President?

  120. @Tiny Duck

    Fox news should be “shut down”? By whom? You can, of course, petition cable companies and satellite TV providers to drop the network, but the government doesn’t (yet) have the authority to shut down media organs because of their political bias.

  121. ic1000 says:
    @Jack D

    > K’s “lies” OTOH, are of a different, much more ambiguous sort

    Blasey Ford’s charges put Kavanaugh in a bind. Since “We Believe Women,” his denial of his presence at a party resembling Blasey Ford’s description had to be absolute.

    Imaginary testimony –

    Kavanaugh — Yeah, I drank a lot at times, to the point of vomiting and passing out and being hung over. And, yeah, my friends and I were sometimes raucous and rowdy while drunk. But I am absolutely sure that I did not attend the party that Blasey Ford has described, and I did not attempt to rape her.

    Sen. Blumenthal: So you admit that your frequent underage binge drinking typically led to “passing out,” but you purportedly believe that you were never black-out drunk.

    Kavenaugh: Senator, let me say that –

    Sen. Blumenthal: Mr. Kavanaugh, that was an observation, not a question. It’s evident to those of us who Believe Women that, even by the lights of your own self-serving testimony, your behavior in high school and college is completely consistent with Dr. Ford’s account of your attempt to rape her.

    So Kavanaugh chose the lesser of two evils by downplaying the extent of his boozing. Thus, the Progressive playbook is abandoning Blasey Ford’s disintegrating narrative in favor of new accounts of flashing, bar fights, blacking out, and being a mean drunk. Because they prove that Kavanaugh is a soft-pedaler twister of the truth liar perjurer, unfit to serve.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    , @Jack D
  122. Jack D says:

    From the Dem POV, K getting on the court also gives them one more issue for the fast approaching November elections – we NEED control of the Senate to stop Trump from ever putting more rapists on the court. If K is defeated, OTOH, it would appear that D control is not that urgent – they have enough power already to torpedo Trump’s worst ideas thanks to their fellow traveling RINOs.

    All that being said, I think that they would still prefer K to be defeated and I doubt that they are really pressuring the swing voters to vote yes. But in terms of grand strategy I think they have done an excellent job (putting aside the R voter backlash – they never seem to count on that).

    Going back to the beginning of the nomination, they are confronted with the situation where they know that K is a nominee with sterling credentials and they don’t have the votes to defeat him.

    The tradition R approach in this situation would be to concede defeat – elections have consequences, we are in the minority and it’s not within our control. Hell, might as well vote yes in the collegial tradition of the Senate since the nominee is so well qualified and endorsed by the ABA and he is going on the court with or without our votes anyway. Someday when the Dems are in control they will surely reciprocate.

    But Chucky and Dianne have a different approach. How can we squeeze this otherwise losing situation for maximum benefit and make lemonade out of this lemon? How can we raise the stakes so that next time after RBG ascends to the Pantheon Trump will think twice about sending another rightist? How can we use this to rile up our voter base and contributors and help us in November? I think they have done a masterful job of turning a what was a sure loss into a positive for their side in many ways even if they don’t succeed in actually torpedoing the nomination (which STILL remains to be seen).

    • Replies: @bomag
  123. Ibound1 says:
    @The Alarmist

    I agree it will make no difference to the Feminazis in pink hats. But with two witnesses to the polygraph coaching (the ex-boyfriend and the best friend) a few credit card records, a few of her Palo Alto tenants, and the Palo Alto tax office records, she could be destroyed – in front of reasonable people. Most normal people will think falsely accusing a man of rape, in order to get out of a tax bill, is disgusting.

  124. ic1000 says:

    > Blasey Ford’s disintegrating narrative

    It’s falling apart if you read stuff, that is. If, instead, you were watching this morning’s DNC News (CBS variant) on the TV, Blasey Ford’s story is as powerful and compelling as it ever was.

  125. Art Deco says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    then you could be described as a professional liar, a select occupational group that includes poker players, politicians, photographers, portrait painters, palm readers, preachers, plastic surgeons, poets, porn stars, public relations officers, and police officers.

    No, it includes palm readers, public relations officers, and politicians. As for the lying of the latter two, it’s commonly in the realm of artifice, where no deception is achieved and sometimes none is intended. Lillian Carter was once asked what she meant when she said her son told ‘white lies’. She replies, “Well, you remember when you came to the door and I said I was glad to see you?”. This sort of deception is part of everyday life and we couldn’t live together without it.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  126. @Steve Sailer

    Are speeding tickets criminal charges?

  127. @Jack D

    If it is just window dressing for yes votes, why were the Democrat Senators the one pushing it?

    Yes, you are right about that, but it was flakey Flake who requested the limited “final, last, extra, ultimate” FBI background check that would only last a week. The Democrats would like an investigation that would last for years if necessary.

    Mind you, the Republicans behaved pretty badly over the Garland nomination, so what is good for the goose is good for the gander. That is the background to all this.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  128. @Jack D

    “The Dick Blumenthal standard…” indeed, Judge Weinstein in the EDNY, probably a favorite of Blumenthal, once stated in an opinion that the maxim of falsus in uno has been demonstrated to be as untrue in law as it is in life.

  129. Art Deco says:

    If he gets the thumbs-up, Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas show the future. Blasey Ford reaps the financial and career benefits of her suffering for the Cause as a victim of the cishet white male patriarchy.

    With a twist that Blasey (who is 15 years older than was Hill in 1935) by all appearances is suited to the employment she currently has and has a family life. From what we know of Hill, her time working for the Department of Education and the EEOC was disfigured by friction between her and other employees and we have reason to believe that her initial employment in BigLaw and all but one of the academic positions she’s had since 1985 were a species of political patronage. Hill is a childless spinster to boot. Being a cigar store Indian at one redoubt in higher education after another and at one speaking engagement after another is a demoralizing way of making a living even if it’s well compensated. Going home to the company of your cat and some box wine doesn’t improve matters much.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  130. Art Deco says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Mind you, the Republicans behaved pretty badly over the Garland nomination, so what is good for the goose is good for the gander. That is the background to all this.

    They didn’t behave badly at all. Obama nominated him and the Senate ignored the nomination, which is their prerogative. He was left in peace, otherwise.

    Correct the Record needs to cut your piece-rate. You’re not getting the job done.

  131. Jack D says:

    K was aware of this trap and he did not deny that he drank a LOT of beer in those days. He (unlike Blasey) didn’t claim that he had “only 1 beer” (more evidence of Blasey’s emotional fixation at an early age and her habitual lying – this is what teenagers tell their parents and it is NEVER true).

    So the argument comes down to what SORT of drunk was he. The Dems (and the witnesses they have dredged up) cannot prove that he was a blackout drunk, which is the only kind of drunk that explains how it is possible for K to truthfully swear to God that he didn’t recalling do this and still have done it. And K has clearly testified that he never drank to the point of blackout – “have you Senator?” His testimony was that he was a high functioning, weekend drunk – a very common thing among successful Irish Catholics. Maintain top grades, play sports, but on Saturday night you have a bunch of beers – doesn’t hurt anyone.

    So far they have witnesses that he was a mean, angry drunk, a belligerent drunk, etc. K didn’t say whether he was or wasn’t. Being a mean drunk sullies K’s reputation (a plus from the D POV) but it doesn’t really negate his denial of having been at that party.

  132. Clyde says:
    @El Dato

    Come on man. It could have been TRUE!

    It doesn’t matter if Christine was lying about a near rape, because feminist pussy hatters know that every single day and night other women are being real raped and “trained” by frat boys the world over.

  133. @JimB

    Blumenthal didn’t watch his buddies die face down in the muck so he could watch Haven Monahan himself become a supreme court justice.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  134. Gordo says:

    Now do you understand why the Senate R-party hired Mitchell to ask questions? Rachel Mitchell is awesome, because she snuck these questions in so easily, so lightly that nobody noticed. And they knew Ford had done this all along; they must have.

    It would be interesting to re-watch this and see any other Mitchell non-sequiturs that might actually have been deadly relevant but we didn’t have the backround into to realise it.

  135. Jack D says:
    @Art Deco

    Times have changed. Now we have Go Fund Me. Without giving a single lecture or putting her name on a ghostwritten fake autobiography, Chrissy now has enough moolah to fund her surfing trips for the rest of her life (or at least for as long as she can get up on a surfboard).

    The Dems kept going on and on about how this had destroyed brave Chrissy’s life and how she feared for her safety (where, BTW is the evidence of the threats – can we see or hear them?) but if I was some future accuser and I saw how much $$$ is flowing Chrissy’s way, I might think that it was really worth it after all.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  136. One thing to bear is mind is the obvious play for Ford and her lawyers here: attack the credibility of her ex-boyfriend. He’s bitter, a stalker type who can’t get over her, etc.

    But my guess is that the Senate Republicans have enough info already to support the ex-boyfriend, and to corroborate at least some of his claims — e.g., regarding the credit card. I doubt they would have brought him up in the Grassley letter had they not done so. And of course the FBI would likely have interviewed many relevant witnesses and retrieved relevant documents. Thank you, Democrats, for making that possible! Above and beyond!

    We’ll have to see how the credibility issue of her ex plays out, of course.

    But one of the curious things is who among the Senators (and Kav’s lawyers) knew what when. Obviously, the Senate Republicans knew about the boyfriend’s claims — otherwise how would Mitchell know to ask the questions she did? But it’s also obvious that the Senate Dems did not at the time — otherwise they wouldn’t have gone all in on her testimony as they did.

    The Senate Dems must feel a little bit sucker punched — having, of course, taken the first sucker punch themselves when they unloaded Ford on the Kav confirmation process at the last minute.

    Let us now praise Karma.

    But it is also my guess that now both the Sen Repubs and Dems are aware of the FBI investigation issues and the credibility problems for Ford. The Sen Dems almost certainly have communicated this impending catastrophe to the media, who have sought other avenues of attack. Ice, puke, Trump’s taxes (why now, Grey Lady? Not enough other news fit to print?).

    The machinations behind the scenes are a tale unto themselves. A great book no doubt will be written some day about it, in wonderment over the craziness.

  137. Jack D says:
    @Art Deco

    Cops lie all the time. Now that we have body cams and everyone and his brother carries a phone with video recording capability, we have some notion of how often they lie.

    As I have mentioned here before, I think truth is overrated. There are situations (K’s current situation is one of them) where you are put in a bind by some unjust rule or situation and the right thing to do is to lie. And I am not just talking about white lies like “what a cute baby”. In certain situations, you are not just excused from telling the truth but you are morally obligated to lie to avoid a greater injustice. To give you an extreme example, my father told the Nazis running his concentration camp that he was a carpenter, when in fact he was a fisherman. He reasoned that there was not much demand for fisherman inside a concentration camp but that the Nazis had uses for skilled craftsmen. And under the circumstance, I think it was absolutely right of him to lie in order to survive. It was not just excusable to lie to the Nazis, it was morally required for him to do so.

    The same thing is true of cops. They are often confronted with situations where they are dealing with scum who they know to be guilty of numerous serious crimes or perhaps where they would lose their jobs if they admitted that they had let anger overtake them and they had used excessive force to make an arrest – if you take a swing at a cop, later he is going to “accidentally” bash your head on the door frame when he puts you in the back of the cop car, you can count on it. Or you might “trip” and fall on your face. These are the rules of the streets. If they really had to do their jobs “by the book” then many criminals would go free and they would lose their jobs. So under such circumstances, it’s appropriate to lie now and then. You still need to maintain your moral compass and not arrest or beat innocent people, but you can’t be bound by some strict textbook notion of truth either.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Art Deco
    , @The Alarmist
  138. Wait… Kavanaugh wrote a letter about renting a place in Joisey with some other guys and trying to get beer and girls. And he signed it with that “Bart” nickname from Judge’s memoir.

    Thus making him unique among college guys in the ’80s…or any other time.

  139. @Bubba

    I just read the article in your link and I would like to add my anecdotal bit. I took the PSAT in 1966. The SAT in 67 and 68.

    From my PSAT scores in the 99% I qualified for what is now the Johns Hopkins test for gifted students, the results of which ranked me overall in the 98%–not among the very elite, obviously.

    With each succeeding test my scores declined. My councilors were dismayed by this, but if what Steve wrote is true, then that may go some way towards explaining why. Test prep would have skewed the results and as it gained traction, would have done so progressively. We public-school midwesterners engaged in no preparation for standardized tests whatsoever and would have looked upon such as “cheating”.

    It’s always been hard for me to believe that I got progressively dumber in high school, but anything’s possible, I suppose.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @anon
    , @Anonymous
  140. @Achilles

    “Perhaps Monica was in law school there in LA at the time she was rooming with Chrissie.”

    Depends on whether or not Monica was a sworn LEO for the FBI. She probably couldn’t have been “in law school” and a sworn FBI officer at the same time as graduation and professional certification (i.e. bar cards in the case of law school agents) were/are?? a requirement to be a sworn FBI officer. In the old days it was bar card or CPA to be a sworn agent. They have expanded professions to include computer forensics, chemistry, linguists/interpreters/translators and maybe some other disciplines.

  141. res says:

    Not sure why these are no longer available live, but here are archive links for converting pre-1995 to post-1995 SAT scores.

    Individual tests:

    Composite scores:

    Based on the latter, old 1340 is equivalent to new 1400.

    Also, as Alec Leamas mentioned, Mensa accepted an old SAT score of 1300 but does not accept any new SAT scores.

    P.S. The Ivies were even easier to get into further back. Which might underlie Daniel H’s comment. Here is a look at Harvard.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @hhsiii
  142. Jack D says:

    I have the feeling that (aside from right wing outlets and perhaps Trump tweets) Chrissy’s credibility problems are never going to be aired publicly, not by the FBI and not by the Republican Senators and not by the MSM. When Trump has mentioned them, the reaction of other Republicans has been as if he had farted in public. Rather what will happen is that (hopefully) K will be confirmed and that will be that. There will be no perjury prosecutions, no disciplinary procedures against lawyers, nothing. It will all be memory holed and we turn the page to Trump’s next outrage the minute the vote is final.

  143. bomag says:
    @Jack D

    Good analysis.

    The Dems lucked out a bit in that there is a current wave of hysteria over sexual assault.

    Also, the Dems present their SCOTUS nominees as centrists, while Repubs present theirs as conservative; in practice, the institution swings left.

  144. Jack D says:

    You can’t go purely by acceptance rate. Back in the day, kids would apply to just a handful of schools. Nowadays, with the common app (and with people having more money and more neurosis) kids apply to 10, even 20 or more schools so the acceptance rate has to go down purely as a mathematical matter (bigger denominator). Kids figure, what the hell, I’ll take a chance. Maybe I’ll get lucky and get into Harvard – I will tell them my story of escaping from Cambodia by boat and having been raped by white football jocks even though I am a non-gender specific person and maybe they will have sympathy on me even though I only have a 3.2 GPA. What the hell, it’s only $75 of my parent’s $ for the application fee.

    And there is a sort of arms race/ circular logic to this – if you know that the chances of getting in are 30% you might apply to only 3 or 4 colleges, figuring that you’ll get in to at least one of them. But if you hear that the acceptance rate is now 8%, you say, I had better send in a dozen applications just to be sure.

  145. MEH 0910 says:
    @Jack D

  146. @The Alarmist

    Speaking of Hillary

    You know, denying the legitimacy of women’s stories is pretty vicious . . . isn’t it?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  147. bomag says:
    @Jack D

    I have the feeling that… Chrissy’s credibility problems are never going to be aired publicly

    Yeah, she’s basically a pawn. But I hope the Senate Repubs sure remember this episode when they have a chance to wack the Dems.

  148. Another possibly interesting point, FWIW: Rehoboth Beach in Delaware is a well known mecca for lesbians.

    I gather Ford’s best friend, Monica McLean, whom Ford is said by her ex to have helped her with a polygraph, lives in Rehoboth Beach (or has some house there).

    Is McLean a lesbian/feminist activist?

    McLean has now denied she was ever helped on the polygraph.

    Since it was very likely illegal for her to have done so, though, it’s not exactly surprising. At minimum, her career might be at stake.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  149. jim jones says:

    Politics in the US is beginning to look sensible compared to the idiots we have here in the UK:

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
  150. black sea says:

    One thing to bear is mind is the obvious play for Ford and her lawyers here: attack the credibility of her ex-boyfriend. He’s bitter, a stalker type who can’t get over her, etc.

    Not believable to anyone who’s seen her in testimony or just in a recent photograph. Even Ford’s female supporters would be hard-pressed to buy the pitch that this guy is still fixated on her. Women can be quite credulous in some ways, and quite shrewd in others. And of course no man other than Tiny Duck could even entertain the thought.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  151. @Jack D

    You’re certainly right that the Senate Republicans are handling Ford with kid gloves despite the obvious flaws in her testimony.

    But I think that a lot of damning info about her will be made available in one fashion or another to buttress the case that she isn’t credible. But they don’t want their own fingerprints on it.

    And the Senate Republicans have every incentive to undermine her over the long haul. Failure to do so will bring only worse allegations in the future. I don’t see them just dropping it. They’ll go after the Dem Senators instead of Ford, whom they will characterize as a victim of the Dems (which in a sense she is. In another time, she’d have been dismissed as a crazy person early on in the process, and left to her private life and fantasies.)

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @anon
  152. The “bad stuff” about the Blasey Ford woman is beginning to break. Her friendship with Monica McLean, a retired FBI agent, is a valuable lead that is connecting to the soft coup plotters in the DOJ/FBI (and don’t forget Brennan, who hangs over this skullduggery like a dungeon spider). I’m still disgusted, but not surprised, by the corporate media’s silence on the Chinese spy in Diane Feinstein’s employ. The American plutocracy is heavily invested in China, so no surprise. And certainly the liberal elites in this country are turning in a Maoist direction in terms of social policies. The China lesson is this: capitalism and communism can coexist. So don’t worry, DiFi; you’re in the clear!

  153. Jack D says:
    @black sea

    The stalker thing is obviously a bridge too far, but bitter is entirely plausible, in fact is probably actually true (not to say that his allegations are not true also). Of course he is bitter – he thought that he was in a long term relationship with a loyal companion, even merged their financial affairs to the point of putting her on his credit card and then he found out that she was cheating. Who wouldn’t be bitter? He is completely open about this and hasn’t claimed that they are still friends.

    • Replies: @miss marple
  154. Precious says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    You don’t just forget that you knew the intricacies of polygraph testing, especially I assume if you’re a psychologist.

    She isn’t a psychologist, she lied about that too. She is not licensed by the California Board of Psychology and without that license she cannot say she is a psychologist without getting herself in legal trouble with the state of California.

  155. @candid_observer

    Good point. There is an undeniable lesbian contingent within the well-funded Trotskyite-Resist movement; and they are not overly fond of white males.

  156. CNN isn’t reputable and should be shut down wolf Blizter is a racist

    Merrick Garbland is unfit and will never be a judge

    Read the comments

    The People are with Kavanaugh

  157. utu says:
    @Jack D

    It was not just excusable to lie to the Nazis, it was morally required for him to do so.

    Not if his lie caused a true carpenter being sent to the gas chamber because there was no carpenter job for him.

  158. Precious says:
    @Tiny Duck

    You made it back! How was your visit to Wakanda?

    • Replies: @El Dato
  159. MEH 0910 says:

    Fox News: Christine Ford’s friend denies being helped on polygraph, fires back at new claims

    On Wednesday, McClean put out a brief statement denying the claim.

    “I have NEVER had Christine Blasey Ford, or anybody else, prepare me, or provide any other type of assistance whatsoever in connection with any polygraph exam I have taken at anytime,” McClean said.

    • Replies: @El Dato
  160. This whole Kavanaugh fiasco is about Democrat desperation. They can see the future, and they fear it. Democrats know that many of their most important causes (abortion, immigration, gun control, etc) are not popular with the majority of Americans and can only be imposed from above by the Courts. They can’t win on these issues legislatively.

    And now they realize they are in danger of losing control of the Supreme Court for a very long time. When/if Kavanaugh is confirmed the court will be 5-4 conservative.

    If/when Ginsberg, Breyer or Sotomayor (all three are either ancient, ill or both) leave the court and are replaced by Trump nominees it could go to 6-3, 7-2 or 8-1!!!!

    There’s every reason to suspect that Trump will be re-elected in 2020 – The country is pretty evenly divided and he will have the advantage of incumbency and it seems pretty certain that he will be running against a very radical opponent.

    And when those vacancies occur the Republicans have no pressing need to replace them. Even if Kavanaugh is not confirmed, one of these three leaving would give the Court a 4-3 conservative majority, another would make it 4-2 and the third 4-1. Conservatives can wait for nominations to be approved as long as the Dems want to hold their breath.

    An aside – I think there is a possibility that what the Democrats have done to Kavanaugh will make some of the more moderate conservative judges currently on the court much less sympathetic to Democrat policies.

  161. Jack D says:

    BTW, the ex-boyfriend who ratted on BF has now been identified by the NY Times. He was actually mentioned last month in a WSJ profile of BF. He sounds a lot more positive about BF in that profile but he repeats that she never mentioned sexual assault or K to him in the past.

    At Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif., where she pursued a master’s degree, [BF] learned to surf and met Brian Merrick, an avid surfer, through mutual friends. They started dating around the end of 1991, which blossomed into an eight-year relationship, said Mr. Merrick, adding that she was “sweet, cute and with a good attitude.” He met and grew fond of her family in the Washington, D.C. area, describing her father as a self-made man whose conservative views sometimes clashed with her liberal outlook. But Mr. Merrick never saw her become involved in or working for a political cause.

    At no point in their relationship did she mention an incident involving Judge Kavanaugh—whose name he had never heard before—or any case of sexual assault.

    “It strikes me as odd it never came up in our relationship,” Mr. Merrick said. “But I would never try to discredit what she says or what she believes.”

    Never say never, Brian. In their story on the Merrick letter, the NY Times helpfully points out that many victims of sexual assault do not bring up their experiences for years after the events and provides a helpful link to one of its own stories as proof :

    Did newspapers always do this kind “experts say” rebuttal right inside a who/what/when/ where story? If someone was accusing Obama of rape, would they have links to a “experts say that 35 year old memories are sometimes unreliable” story?

    • Replies: @candid_observer
  162. @candid_observer

    The worst case legal scenario for Ford is that Kavanaugh will be elected and this whole thing will be forgotten. She was never going to see the inside of a prison any more than Judge Kavanaugh was.

    Her problem is that this scandal will live on in infamy on the internet. All the detailed dirt that is coming out now on the internet will accumulate and not go away and the cherished iconic image of the matron saint fighting the patriarchy will be sullied in a way that will not advance the cause even if she makes gains out of the deal.

    There will be a subset of the population that will have “I believe you Anita Christine” bumper stickers but with every ex-boyfriend to come forward and every connection to the Democratic party manipulating and orchestrating this mess will not go down the memory hole the same way Anita Hill did in a pre- internet age. Ford’s die has been cast. No one will ever admit to being part of this conspiracy and unless the other investigations of leaks and breach of fiduciary pans out you will just see denial and empty accusations by the 20% of the population that would back up Ford even if she had been caught red handed.

  163. @candid_observer

    Well, yeah. Pretty sure the GOP had this information beforehand. I remember very distinctly Mitchell asking about the polygraph tests, and her fear of flying. It seemed strange to me that she focused so much on those topics at the time, but it would make sense if she already had this information going in.

  164. @anon

    They say that in Stillwater too.

    You mean this Stillwater?

  165. @Jack D

    Given what he had already said on the record about her, it’s going to be hard to say that he made up his allegations out of some bitterness.

    If anything, this early profile and quotes makes those allegations seem more like admission against interest.

    He had a great opportunity to spill on her in the WSJ interview, but obviously chose not to offer up anything negative, and instead went purely positive. Why, if he was still bitter?

    • Replies: @Jack D
  166. @AnonyMoose

    Of those Senate races you mention:

    NV goes (D)
    MT goes (D)
    WV goes (D)

    Everyone else goes (R).

    This really has lit a fire under the Republican base. Trump’s rallies, which were going a little stale beforehand, are now fiery and high energy again. I do hope that they manage to keep the House. I say that’s around 50/50 right now.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  167. Jack D says:

    I dunno, but he really seems to have changed his tune or tone between the WSJ interview (mid-September) and the Grassley letter. Maybe Grassley’s investigators pinned him down with skillful questioning (modern reporters don’t seem to be worth a damn, especially when they are investigating things that they don’t really want to investigate) ? Maybe he learned something that made him change his tune? Maybe he grew irritated at all the public pronouncements of BF’s sainthood when he knew her to be a cheat and a thief? Maybe the “fear of flying” nonsense reminded him of what a liar she was – you can only imagine what lies she must have told to Merrick while she was cheating on him.

  168. @Jack D

    This messy, subjective personal stuff belongs on Geraldo/Jerry Springer/Ricki Lake not on CSPAN. It’s often sensationalistic and greatly distorted (so the tattletale can feel better about themselves usually). You also can’t overestimate how much people will lie to their friends and relatives to appear to be more of a victim. God help you if some dufus sibling of an ex doesn’t figure this out and decides to get revenge on behalf of baby brother. (Could you imagine being some hapless only child having multiple large families gunning for you?)

    If the Dims had simply presented a legal case about Kavanaugh’s judicial rulings, they would’ve been much more effective and saved face too.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Jack D
  169. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:

    It looks bad but is just another case of someone feeling a pressing civic duty to rat someone out. Civic duty seems to be breaking out all over.

    People that want to believe her aren’t paying attention. Skeptics have more doubt regarding her credibility.

    People are done with this.

  170. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:

    Leak lines to NYT and Fox are wide open 24/7. Unfavorable info will be leaked within the hour.

  171. Ragno says:
    @Mr. Blank

    Get back to me when this is over, and tell me about what consequences Dr. Ford faced for perjury.

    You’re joking, right? We now live in a country where not a single antifa has been hit with a prison sentence, or even a draconian fine – and these are violent radicals given to wanton property damage and assaulting people with weapons.

    If antifa regularly walk, there will be no repercussions for Ford. Not even a swat across the knuckles with a rubber ruler. Forget 1917 – we’re living through the Bolshevik belle epoque right here and right now.

    • Replies: @Iberiano
  172. Anonymous[197] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Maybe so few bad skeletons in the closet because they’re both Anglo Christian white?

  173. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:

    The NYT has gone all Becky on Trump.

    No one cares how much Fred gave him.

    The tax stuff is not actionable as much as the Times would like to have the authority of the IRS.

    Every return was audited at an appropriate time. If New York manufactures something, it will look blatantly political and stuck in courts for years.

  174. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    Cops lie all the time.

    You know, I had a congenial friend many years back who claimed to know how the protection rackets in Rochester worked. No clue how he was going to learn that in his day job as a special ed administrator. Very entertaining raconteur, though.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  175. hhsiii says:

    I got 760 verbal 720 math (but the math score was my second test; I got 540 the first time and they only count the higher score).

    So 1480 composite is now 1580, but 760 verbal = 800, and 720 math = 720 still. So composite doesn’t just add up the 2 scores when translated.

    Anyway, my scores were considered very good back then, but I didn’t have great grades. Didn’t get into Yale (where my mother attended and my sister later graduated), and wait-listed at Penn. Thus I went to UNC-Chapel Hill, my dad’s alma mater. But I still think it ws relatively esier to get into ivies and the like back then. I just wasn’t a very driven student although I tested well. But for kids who also got good grades there wasn’t as much of a tiger mom among the smaller asian community, and although there was affirmative action, not sure it was as much a problem, although it obviously kept some qualified kids out.

    My nieces had great resumes and the like, and went to Smith and Wesleyan. Couldn’t get into the Harvards and Yales.

  176. Jack D says:
    @miss marple

    I agree with you that this whole thing deteriorated into soap opera/farce long ago but this was inevitable when the Dems made a national office hinge on personal character assassination. She who sows the wind will inherit the whirlwind.

    She has gotten away with a lot more than she should have up until now because you are not allowed to “blame the victim” and must “believe women” under the Calvinball rules that the Dems have created, while K’s yearbook jokes and drinking habits from 1982 were minutely parsed. The Dems were free to throw as much mud as they wanted on K and accuse him of being a blackout drunk but if Trump mentioned that maybe Blasey’s “just one beer” and “I can’t remember any detail that would give K the possibility of producing an alibi” was not 100% credible, there were gasps of horror and outrage.

    Today seems to be the day that the dam has broken on this and we begin to see that character assassination can be a two way street, that BF’s testimony can be impeached just like that of any other witness and that BF herself is not some sort of secular saint but just another flawed human.

  177. @hooodathunkit

    Maybe, just maybe, Ms Mitchell knew to ask what in hindsight appear to be very significant and precise questions (and even at the time appeared, to me, to be strangely precise) because she was directed to do so?

    By people who already knew the answers to those questions?

    It’s all on the record now.

    Who walked right into whose trap?

    There’s nothing like being three steps ahead of the people who wish you ill.

  178. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    She grew up in plush circumstances and one might wager has expensive tastes. That having been said, in my experience, faculty members are satisficers in regard to their material consumption. They have what they consider the basics (they make their mortgage payments, meet their savings targets, have a stash for foreign travel on their own dime or the foundation dime, have a satisfactory pension, have medical insurance, and have the means to finance their own children’s schooling) and additional income does not motivate them. A magazine profile of Lawrence Summers in 2008 noted that his car was 12 years old (I think a Geo). I knew a senior faculty member at the U of R who lived with her husband and daughter in a shabby 2d story walk-up. I knew others who lived two blocks from the slums. Faculty members want security, want time, want deference, want things money cannot buy. I’m gonna lay wagers that people whose good opinion she cares about know she’s so full of it her eyes are brown. That’s going to hang over her as long as she lives, even though she has a real life and not a parody of one a la Hill.

  179. Jack D says:
    @Art Deco

    So you are saying that there were really no protection rackets in Rochester?

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  180. @Svigor


    So she gets away with a technicality, submitting something that would not be evidence in a court but which she may very well be knowingly using to deceive the committee and the American public.

    If you look closely, it seems that her accusation, her story, and everything about this is chock full of technicalities and holes that appear to be intelligently, deliberately arranged to slip by both law and reason.

    It is Clintonesque — but of course that depends on what the definition of “is” is.

  181. So there are reports that people who knew Kavanaugh in college and witnessed him being an obnoxious drunk have tried to talk to the FBI and are being ignored. I don’t know if anyone actually witnessed him whipping out his willy in front of Ramirez, or it’s all hearsay.

    This somewhat speaks to his character (quasi-reformed drunk or liar?), but still does not prove that he did or did not assault Christine Ford in 1980-whatever it was. They are essentially arguing about whether he was capable of doing such a thing, not whether he did.

    There are people who partied their tailfeathers off in high school, and calmed down by college. There are others who were pretty tame in high school, but when they went away to college, all hell broke loose.

    Only one article that I have seen discussed Kavanaugh’s rulings on labor grievances and alleged torture of terror suspects, and disapproved of him based on that.

    • Replies: @anon
  182. @Cortes

    The optics are very hard on Republicans when they go after Ford and her support group for the obvious reason of sympathy and bias in favor of women. But it is also hard for Feinstein & Co. to go after the ex-boyfriend for the same reason. Perhaps not as much, but he / they are really not people they want to have a discussion with because they have nothing to gain and possibly everything to lose. My guess is that they will ignore this guy. They also cannot blow them off because of the imposed solemness of the alleged gang rape /assault. They are caught too in their own trap.

    One of the benefits of the red-pilling of America is that these men are coming forward, only they are not bullshitting like the sisters-in-skin coalition. They have no need to, no financial gain, and no motivation other than the truth. You also saw this with Swetnick’s ex-boyfriend and his wife on TV. Now that everyone has a sexual history, they don’t need to hide their past from their current lovers / spouses and can come forward to tell the truth. You see this happen with men who have remarried and who’s new wife / lover is also harassed by the psycho ex-wife. He was normal and went on with his life while she joined the box wine resistance and acquired cats (Hat tip to Heartiste).

  183. Jack D says:

    “Experts say” that women who have been assaulted often never mention these things to anyone for up to 30 or 35 years until their assaulter is about to be confirmed for the Supreme Court. This is very common reaction to trauma. I read this in the NY Times so it must be true.

  184. Thea says:
    @Senator Brundlefly

    Once people believe a thing, it is very difficult to get them to change there minds. Getting your narrative into the media first is huge. Whatever facts trickle in later have less weight in many people’s mind.

    As with Ferguson, revealing the truth just doesn’t change much.

    Truly people on both sides fall into this trap. With the echo chamber, it is to be guarded against.

  185. @utu

    Yeah I can think of at least one carpenter the Jews had killed.

    • LOL: utu
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  186. Jack D says:

    You are setting the bar too high. This was not some situation in an ethics textbook. My father was not aiming for sainthood like Father Kolbe. He just wanted to live. I forgive him for lying in this situation and I believe that if there is a God that God forgave him too. God tells us to choose life.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @utu
    , @Old Palo Altan
  187. OT,

    Got Trump’s Presidential alert on my cell phone a short while ago.

    Did he do that just to trigger everybody on the left? Let them know he’s living not just in their heads, but in their cellphones?

    • Replies: @candid_observer
  188. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Its a game of inches. The Democrats had 60 votes until Kennedy died and they lost the Senate Seat with a candidate that was chosen based on seniority. We are paying for the Roy Moore debacle.

    OT, but meanwhile, NFL ratings up. Nike is winning on there bet, and people are tired of the kneeling controversy. They basically won the Kavanaugh optics game, but jumped the shark with the ‘white male privilege’ meme. Kavanaugh went to Georgetown PREP, and so what if fort is a slut. No one is looking for nuance. Big winner…pervy Holywood democrats vulnerable to $metoo.

    Time to move on with culture wars.

  189. @ic1000

    Bet Senate Dems wish they had engaged Debbie “WashYourHair” Schultz’s computer guys. On second thought, they might pull a train on Blasey, so maybe not such a good idea.

  190. The lie detector kit I assembled when I was 13 years old:

    It was about as accurate as the one fooled by The Right Professor Dr. Blah Blah Ford, Ph.D.

  191. Jack D says:

    I don’t know your age at these times but to qualify for the Johns Hopkins “Study of Exceptional Talent” you have to score over 700 on either the Math or Verbal section of the SAT before you reach age 13. They are trying to identify gifted kids before they start high school.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  192. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosamond Vincy

    He’s a drunk, she’s a slut. Ho Hum. Ken Starr was creepy. Im with Steve, considering the energy put into digging up the past, Is that all??

  193. @Federalist

    It is not just perjury … Lying to a Congressional committee is a violation of 18 USC § 1001, the same one they got Martha Stewart on and the one they are pinning on General Flynn.

  194. Yngvar says:

    This is not something that requires a lot of thought. In modern parlance; Christine Blasey Ford is a whore! A political whore, at the least.

  195. @candid_observer

    Presidential alert to the left:

    Where ever you are, there I am!


  196. @miss marple

    I was home, ill, one day, and I saw a case on Judge Rinder (kind of the gay UK version of Judge Judy) with exactly this fact pattern. The guy was laughed out of court, but only because he didn’t give proper notice at the time money was laid out.

  197. @BigDickNick

    Blumenthal is generally face UP in the muck, nowadays.

  198. prusmc says: • Website

    Come On, Steve…. let’s get to the good stuff!
    Was this guy one of the 57 guys she had sex with before college?
    How often did they have sex?
    What kind of sex did they have?
    How many abortions did she have?
    What was her favorite position?
    Were there threesomes or group sex?
    Did they have sex in the back seat of the car?
    Did she ask him to tie her up?
    What kind of sex toys were employed?
    We’re animals involved?
    Since she was known for multiple sex partners did she ever have VD ?
    Did she like to wear high boots and carry handcuffs, chains or parachute cord?
    Did she use whips or paddles on her partners?
    Did she want to be whipped or suffer any discomfort?
    Did she like to do it in the road, high grass or woods?
    After answering these questions we will know wether or not she was a typical all-American girl of the 1980s.
    Inquiring minds want to know.

  199. @Jack D

    Notice, too, that FBI agents don’t record interviews; they complete 302 forms, which provides a handy layer of abstraction.

  200. @Inquiring Mind

    “You know, denying the legitimacy of women’s stories is pretty vicious . . . isn’t it?”

    It’s such a heinous crime that the rules of due process are, of necessity, suspended.

  201. Jack D says:
    @miss marple

    If the Dims had simply presented a legal case about Kavanaugh’s judicial rulings, they would’ve been much more effective and saved face too.

    As I explain elsewhere, that strategy had zero chance of success and would not have excited the base nearly as much as the Rape of St.Chrissy has. K was rated as highly qualified and had the votes. His judicial rulings were mainstream conservative and no R Senator (and maybe even a few conservative D Senators) could have voted against him on policy grounds and still have called themselves conservatives to their voters. In fact the Dims HAD presented their case and the Judiciary Committee hearings had concluded and the consensus was that he was going to be confirmed. So a conventional strategy would NOT have been effective.

    The only real downside to the Dem strategy (and for some reason they NEVER see white backlash coming) is that this brouhaha has fired up the Republican base, perhaps even more than the D base, so it is probably not going to have the desired effect in November.

    And if K gets on the Court it will have failed on that account anyway.

    And (just like doing away with the filibuster) they have just made it harder for themselves the next time the tables are turned – from now on, all S. Ct. nominees will have to have spotless records going back to kindergarten. I can see the President’s advisor’s quizzing the guy or gal: “Is there anything that you did in 1st grade that you would like to tell us about?”

  202. utu says:
    @Jack D

    I agree but it was you who framed it as a moral precept: “It was not just excusable to lie to the Nazis, it was morally required for him to do so.” which left him w/o a choice. But he had a choice and he did the right thing not because he was morally required to lie to the Nazis but because he wanted to live.

    When Harry Wu came to the US he did not talk about the moral law that permitted him to survive but about his shame that he survived at expense of others:

    Imprisoned as a “counterrevolutionary rightist,” he cannot forget what he did to stay alive: cheating, lying, fighting and, worst of all, stealing food from a starving man.

    “I turned myself into a beast,” the soft-spoken, scholarly Wu recalled recently. “Many people passed away. Many people are still there. It is shameful to survive.”

    You are trivializing your father’s experience.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @academic gossip
  203. amen says:

    But … this isn’t really all that much bad stuff.

    Committing perjury — lying under oath on National TV, in front of the Senate and the entire country is not that much bad stuff?

    I’d hate to see what iSteve thinks is the really bad stuff.

    Integrity is the most important attribute that separates us from 3rd world countries. Without it, we are no different from them. The (((Left))) have turned us into a 3rd world country with their increasingly extreme dishonesty.

  204. LOL. Hey man this is the alt-right. I thought we were supposed to be Nazi-Nazis not grammar Nazis

  205. @NickG

    “A Valley girl in training perhaps?”

    Ummm…did you just assume my gender? #triggered

  206. El Dato says:
    @MEH 0910

    “Rashomon” more like “Washomon”

  207. @Jack D

    Of course he was right to lie: it is a hallowed Catholic (or maybe just Jesuit) principle that one is not required to answer a question truthfully which the questioner has no moral right to ask.

    I shall now chance my arm and hope that you will answer truthfully despite my lack of a moral right to ask: your father was a fisherman? Where in God’s earth (other than Galilee of course) were Jews ever fishermen?

    • Replies: @El Dato
    , @Jack D
  208. El Dato says:
    @Jack D

    I can see the President’s advisor’s quizzing the guy or gal: “Is there anything that you did in 1st grade that you would like to tell us about?”

    It’s good to know that the Democracy will be dead and buried when all the data that Zuckerberg & al. solicit then leave lying around (and/or stashed on shingled disks in a Utah data warehouse) becomes relevant.

  209. anon[322] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s always been hard for me to believe that I got progressively dumber in high school,

    Not hard to believe at all. My son who is actually in JH’s SET tells me all the time that high school is making him dumber, esp. these days when all they care about is gay rights, trans rights…forget college, the ideological battleground has now shifted to K-12.

  210. El Dato says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    Of course he was right to lie: it is a hallowed Catholic (or maybe just Jesuit) principle that one is not required to answer a question truthfully which the questioner has no moral right to ask.

    I have never heard of that principle but that seriously just seems to be common sense.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  211. Iberiano says:

    We seem to have lived in the same Gen-X world, her claims, even the ones that are foundationaly possible, don’t jive with anyone who lived as a teen through the ’80s. It sounds like someone making up a story about a party in the 80s, as seen through the lens, and of the audience of, The Current Year.

  212. Twinkie says:

    The poster boy for stolen valor just had to be a (((Blumenthal)))? The demographic least likely to serve; their enrollment is 1/10th their share of the population.

    Lower than Indians (South Asian)?

    • Replies: @Svigor
  213. El Dato says:

    You made it back! How was your visit to Wakanda?

    “He got a nasty case of the claptrap.”

  214. Twinkie says:

    attack the credibility of her ex-boyfriend. He’s bitter, a stalker type who can’t get over her, etc.

    Character assassination for thee, but not for me.

  215. Iberiano says:

    I think it’s been pretty well established at this point, other than a few exceptions at the local level, a woman can levy whatever charges she wants and even a whisper of holding her accountable for making false allegations, is considered in bad taste–at the least. And arguably, the larger, more public the figure accused, the more easily she can do so without any concern of consequences. No one really believes even if they proved beyond any doubt, that “Dr.” Ford lied about several material issues, she would be held accountable. Perhaps if Dr. Kavanagh (Juris) were to sue for defamation, but there are many hurdles to that as well, including the fact that most of what she said was in an oath-given setting and he is a public figure, raising the standard.

    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    , @Hibernian
  216. Jack D says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    Surely you have heard of gefilte fish?

    He was a freshwater fisherman. He fished in the ponds of a nearby estate (which were stocked – a form of aquaculture) and rivers. I went to see his shtetl and the ponds are still there (and breathtakingly beautiful, at least in summer, with reeds and wildflowers and birds) and there was still a sign advertising the sale of “Karp”.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  217. Twinkie says:
    @Jack D

    from now on, all S. Ct. nominees will have to have spotless records going back to kindergarten.

    They better have been good fetuses in their mommas’ bellies. “I saw his mother throw up a lot during the pregnancy. He was a terrible baby who made his mother sick. He clearly hates women, especially mothers.”

    • Replies: @Jack D
  218. Jack D says:

    Believe me, I am not. Among the last words my father ever spoke to me, when he was on his deathbed were, “you should know, I never did wrong to anyone”. By this he did not mean that he had never overcharged a customer or cheated on his taxes – he was a human and not a saint. He was referring to his war experience where, not only did people do things like steal bread from other prisoners, but some became Jewish police in ghettos and kapos in the camps. But he was letting me know that had he had never done such a thing, even when his survival was at stake, and that he could leave this world with a clear conscience.

    Not some abstract academic hypothetical BS about how lying to the Nazis about being a carpenter might cause a real carpenter to be gassed.

    You are morally required to break the other commandments to save a life even if it your own life.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @utu
    , @Autochthon
  219. Ibound1 says:
    @Jack D

    The GOP is too spineless to act this way. They don’t know what it is to fight. Trump and the NRA are the only institutions that know how to fight like the Left.

  220. Jack D says:

    “Just like Trump, his nominee likes to pee on women. In fact he peed on his own mother. I saw him do this once with my own eyes. I swear under penalty of perjury that this is true. ”

    Really? What were the circumstances?

    “He was 9 months old and his mother was changing his diaper.”

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  221. JimB says:

    I wonder if Mark Judge is related to Mike Judge.

  222. Anon[237] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    “You are morally required to break the other commandments to save a life even if it your own life.”

    Whose morals? Divine law as taught and exemplified by Christ teaches that you are required to save your soul, even and unto laying down your life for others.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  223. utu says:
    @Jack D

    Listen, I have no problem with your father. My problem is you coming up with a moral law that one’s duty was to lie to the Nazis. I suspect that your father would not put anything like that in his words. People did what they did because they wanted to survive.

    I should not have said that you were trivializing your father’s experience. You were distorting it by adding to it your own cockiness which I am sure was absent there. It is easy to be cocky 70 years later having only a second hand experience.

  224. @Anon7

    That’s a hell of an own goal then considering that

    1) Graham is demanding Trump re-nominate Kavenaugh if the vote fails on the floor.

    2) The Republican base seems absolutely livid at how the Dems are pretending that every woman with a case of BPD and a “I was there!” allegation is worthy of chin stroking pontification. The Senate is now likely to not only stay Republican, but the possibility of a supermajority is now within reach. The House looks more and more likely to stay in Republican hands with each day, all because the Democrats thought the “Me Too!” suicide bomber ploy would work on anyone.

    • Replies: @Anon7
  225. @Jack D

    I said “what is now the John Hopkins test”. Back then the SCAT was not administered by Johns Hopkins. To take it you had to score highly on the PSAT and be recommended by a faculty or something like that. It’s hard to get information about older tests. I don’t know much more than that. All I have is my scores. 99% Math, 99% General Reasoning on an early high school test, 98% SCAT. Later SATs not so high. I’m not especially smart. Many people who comment here have quicker minds than I do. I’m a plodder.

  226. @Jack D

    I know the ones in Bohemia, and they are indeed beautiful.
    Thank you – most evocative.

  227. Wow! Connie Chung, writing sexual assault porn in support of Blassy-Ford in an editorial to WashPost. Here’s a sample, an accounting of her gyno exam:

    “Here I was in my 20s and I had never had a gynecological examination. I had never even seen exam stirrups before. It was extremely odd to spread my legs and dig my heels into those cold iron stirrups.
    While I stared at the ceiling, his right index finger massaged my clitoris. With his right middle finger inserted in my vagina, he moved both fingers rhythmically. He coached me verbally in a soft voice, “Just breathe. ‘Ah-ah,’ ” mimicking the sound of soft breathing. “You’re doing fine,” he assured me.
    Suddenly, to my shock, I had an orgasm for the first time in my life. My body jerked several times. Then he leaned over, kissed me, a peck on my lips, and slipped behind the curtain to his office area.”

    Washington Post published that. Sounds like the Testimony of Ali Raisman of Olympic gym fame. If you ask me, she should have sent flowers. They ENJOYED their “molestation” years ago to the point of orgasm, yet still, they complain. Honey, if you went back for more, it wasn’t molestation and if you had an orgasm, he did you a favor..The Link:–and-its-seared-into-my-memory-forever/2018/10/03/2449ed3c-c68a-11e8-9b1c-a90f1daae309_story.html?utm_term=.476269ea4d43

  228. so, dr fraud ruins a man’s life permanently, including his family’s lives. tells lies to federal government that should under normal circumstances see her sent away to prison for 10 years or more. is uncovered as a life long liar, backstabber, and fraud. interferes with the functioning of the entire national government. but

    “I’m kind of surprised by how little bad stuff has emerged so far”

    you have to be kidding, steve.

    she’s the worst, least believable, lying liar that the democrats have EVER sent up to rig something. and that’s saying something.

    • Replies: @JimB
  229. @Iberiano

    Feminism will lose a lot of capital because of this stunt. They tried to use their leverage to deny a SCOTUS seat only to lose both. In fact, I think the whole race-baiting racket watched their stock go down as well. You can only use it so many times before the other side becomes immune.

  230. @Jack D

    Overcharging people and cheating on taxes are two of the things hardly any moral person has done, and two of the least likely to have been done by decent folks in the heat of the moment or such. It’s classic that these two you cite are so stereotypically Jewish!! Did he succumb to lust and temptation and have a tryst he should not have? Did he fudge a résumé to get needed employment? Give in to cowardice and malinger in the army when his courage failed him? These are typical shortcomings for basically good men. Nope, your dad, with all do respect, cheated people out of their due for no apparent reason. You guys just cannot help yourselves. #shamelessness

  231. @El Dato

    Of course it is. It’s what underlies the obligation to obey lawful orders, the blamelessness of hiding silently if an evil doer calls for you to come out and show yourself to him, and so on. Hell, it strongly undergirds the right of silence to avoid against self-incrimination.

    Overly formal and rigid morality about honesty would lead to this sort of thing:

  232. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Give Ford the Lillian Hellman Award for Truth and Honesty.

    She should write a book DEMENTIMENTO.

  233. 3g4me says:

    @80 Bubba: “Blumenthal is a real sociopath and no different than the well-documented, true Senatorial sociopath, burning-in-hell Ted Kennedy in that respect.”

    Which also tells one a great deal about the people of Connecticut who keep re-electing him. I have no sympathy or pity or time or patience for normies. NONE. If you are still blind to what is going on in former America, it is by choice and will and you deserve everything that is coming.

  234. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:

    FWIW, the PSAT is a bit easier than the SAT. I remember we were all forced to take the PSAT during school, while you had to register for the SAT on your own and take it on a Saturday if you wanted to take it. That might affect the percentiles.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  235. 3g4me says:

    @90 ChrisZ: “If they had the nerve to do so, then Lois Lerner would be serving hard time now. They’re just relieved to see the back end of this episode—and to feel secure that their own indiscretions were not exposed in the process.”

    This. 100 times this.

  236. JimB says:
    @prime noticer

    And she lied about the death threats, too. Unless she means the ones she gets all the time from her dissatisfied therapy customers.

  237. @The preferred nomenclature is...

    He got into trouble by being a Rabbi, not a carpenter.

  238. J.Ross says: • Website

    The context was abundantly clear.

  239. 22pp22 says:

    Every time I read anything on this topic my eyes roll further back into my head. The NZHerald is worse than CNN. It is shocked that he drank as a student. Pass the sick bucket.

    This kind of behaviour is normal among ninety percent of Kiwi students. In fact, holding your girlfriend’s hand as she pukes into the hedge is part of the Kiwi courtship ritual.

  240. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Jack D


  241. @Travis

    You’ve described the world I knew, including the slapping and punching over-eager creeps.

    Btw, in addition to sluts, prudes (who probably aren’t there), and already in a relationship, there is another category: the romantic. She shows up at the party partly hoping a particular guy will be there and she’ll have a chance to talk to him, and maybe it will turn into something more. She is not looking for a hookup–she wants a relationship. She may be open to meeting other guys, especially if her crush isn’t there, or shows up with another girl, or otherwise displays lack of interest, but she’s not going to welcome Creepo’s suggestion that they do a threeway with his equally drunk and obnoxious friend, especially when accompanied by wandering hands.

  242. mbabbitt says:

    Dr. Ford now appears to be fabulist or outright liar. Nothing she says has been corroborated and several things refuted: second door to her house, fear of flying. Just amazing record of garbage assertions. If that’s minor, I do have bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

  243. Hibernian says:

    Sounds like it could defeat a polygraph.

  244. Hibernian says:

    I’m talking about the difficulty of convincing a jury that it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that she’s a perjurer.

  245. trelane says:
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    The idea that everyone was somehow “above average” should have been the giveaway this guy was a perv.

  246. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    No, I’m saying a special ed administrator was an amusing raconteur, but probably not knowledgeable about it.

    And, at that point, likely not. The Sicilianate mob was always one of the weakest families and local prosecutors had pretty much busted it up by 1987.

  247. One odd thing about the response to the ex-boyfriend’s letter.

    It’s now been over 24 hrs since it was released, but we have yet to hear a single word from Ford’s lawyers directly, so far as I know.

    They don’t seem to have an obvious play here that works, I’d guess.

  248. @jim jones

    The good point of Theresa May is that she makes prime ministers like Stanley Baldwin, Ramsey MacDonald and Neville Chamberlain look like Palmerston, Gladstone and Disraeli by comparison.

  249. Hibernian says:

    Maybe a lawyer, or a layman more legally knowledgeable than me, can answer this question: What if any effect does the fact that lies were told under oath have on a civil action for libel and/or slander arising from those lies? (Does it make it worse? Is there any kind of immunity? etc., etc.)

    • Replies: @Jack D
  250. @Rosamond Vincy

    I didn’t say (((they))) had Him killed because He was a carpenter.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  251. MarkinLA says:

    The sad fact is that Jon Tester was one of the five Democrats who kept the lame duck amnesty from getting past cloture. I hope he loses because we need all the Republicans we can get if we are ever going to move on immigration. He did oppose the Patriot Act.

  252. Jack D says:

    Citizen testimony during legislative proceedings is subject to a “qualified privilege”. If a qualified privilege applies to a statement, it means that the person suing for defamation must prove that the person who made the defamatory statement acted intentionally, recklessly, or with malice, hatred, spite, ill will or resentment (the exact formulation varies from state to state).

    K is already a “public figure” so the malice standard would apply to him anyway. In the Civil Rights Era, some Southern sheriffs decided to retaliate against the NY Times by suing them in front of sympathetic Southern juries and the S. Ct. cut this off at the knees by making it almost impossible to libel a public official.

    The fact that the defendant made the defamatory statement under oath doesn’t have any effect per se. If I nail a defamatory letter to the courthouse door or nail a sworn affidavit in the same place, the defamation is the same.

  253. MB says: • Website

    Oh come on. We’re not sure if she really remembers how many front doors there are, where she lives or what her name is.

    But we can send the FBI to check it out once she does remember and before anybody lets her get in front of anything that resembles a live mike, never mind a real one paid for by our taxdollars.

    J’accuse indeed. The woman is a fraud, even if K is the best the Admin can come up with. (
    For that matter, K really could be a sexist boor and a drunken jerk, but there is a time frame, limit and rules for credible accusations – like rounding up credible witnesses – never mind that Feinstein at minimum should be censured for sitting on this until the last minute.

  254. wren says:

    One of the more iStevey aspects of this is that the guy sells beach front Malibu real estate.

    Caldwell Banker top 100.

    He has to be very well connected to some very elite folks, some of whom may not forget this.

    So he is putting his neck on the line here, I think.

  255. @MB

    K really could be a sexist boor and a drunken jerk

    Thank you, you have just put into words what I have been struggling to parse out.

    I don’t know if Kavanaugh is now, or ever has been, a sexist boor and a drunken jerk, although some of his companions in high school and college seem to think he was. I do know there is no case here.

  256. Svigor says:

    Good question, I have no idea. My quasi-educated guess is you’re right, pajeet enrollment rates are probably lower. ‘Course nobody really looks at them and thinks, “American.” They’re certainly nowhere near as well-represented among “American” opinion-makers and war-mongers as Jews are.

  257. @The preferred nomenclature is...

    He was one of (((them))). If a Roman or Macedonian had gone around shooting off his mouth and attracting attention from the occupation government, (((they))) wouldn’t have given a toss.

    • Replies: @Anon
  258. @utu

    Most people in those situations are very well aware of the moral conflicts.

    Honesty is a means, not an end. The goal is to have a high trust, low friction, low transaction cost society. Where excessive honesty lacks those benefits (reporting neighbors to Stasi, telling people they’re ugly) it is often better to avoid it. Providing truthful information to your murderer has never been part of any ethical code.

  259. Sally B says:

    Blumenthal was never in Vietnam. He never left stateside. False in one thing false in everything Mr. Blumenthal. What a hypocrite.

    • Replies: @JimB
  260. Sally B says:

    Blasey Ford probably had two doors in her house one for her family the other for her students to go into her home office. Senator had a nerve asking Kavanaugh about drinking when he was once drunk in a Senate session. He’s a known heavy drinker. Senator Booker alias Spartacus admitted to sexually putting his hands on a girl while she was drunk. Gilliam who is running I think in Florida once commented on a theatrical show he watched saying”The only good thing about the show was the women had big boobs and tight asses. The democrats are total hypocritic obstructionists.

  261. Anon7 says:
    @Jack Hanson

    I’m tempted to feel good about Republican chances this fall, but then I remember how sure I was that Donald Trump would kick ass, but that election was close.

    The media absolutely owns the minds and emotions and votes of about half the people who vote. These people believe every word of Christine Ford’s testimony, and now believe that a rapist is a Justice of the Supreme Court.

    I’ll believe that this incident will peel male Democrats away their party when I see it happen. It’s really hard to hold an opinion that is radically different from that held by all of your friends.

  262. Anon[411] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosamond Vincy

    It always strikes me as strange the Gospels are constantly referring to the Jews. I mean, I would think it somewhat overpatriotic if an English novelist (Trollope, say?) felt it necessary to constantly mention that his characters were Englishmen. Is that just Jewish pride or is it to distinguish them from the Syrians, Greeks and Romans who might happen to be around? Or is it an artifact of the apostles’ Greek diction?

    I can already guess without reinforcement, for instance, when there’s a crowd at the raising of Lazarus that it’s a (((crowd))).

  263. JimB says:
    @Sally B

    Blumenthal looks like a moth-eaten corpse. His estate should sue the undertaker.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
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.