Wish I could believe that.
Bet you thought there wasnât going to be a public hearing either. My guess is that a few sane Republicans told their leadership either we learn more or we are voting against Kavanaugh. So it will turn on what they learn.
2 Likes
Or it just flatlines. When lying becomes second natureâŚ
Pretty easy, this is why he walked into a political trap on this one, if there is anything at all to her story.
His denial is so unequivocal that itâs not a he-said/she-said anymore. Either there was some party that both of them were at, and things may or may not have happened, or there wasnât. There are witnesses, including one named. Judge, the witness, has already swapped his story a couple of times, settling on the âno recollectionâ in the last, following Fordâs identification on Sunday.
So either Kavanaugh testifies under oath (and therefore under penalty of perjury, although lying to Congress is a crime regardless of being under oath) that there was no party, that he never encountered this woman and was never in a room with her and Judge without others present. Or he hedges, and goes into the âno recollectionâ.
Heâs smart, he wants to avoid any legal problems, so watch for the hedge. If he testifies directly, and there are other witnesses who testify differently, thereâs the root of a case there.
7 Likes
Backing Kavanaugh now is looking more and more like announcing that you believe â legitimateâ rape is a good thing.
1 Like
This article leaves out some details that make this statement misleading: âUnfortunately, committee Democrats have refused to join us in this effort.â
Republican senators initially wanted their staffers to interview her or them by phone. Why would Dems go along with that?
3 Likes
Would be nice to have someone ask Kavanaugh the hypothetical, âIf you accidentally got a girl pregnant while black-out drunk at a party, would you support her right to terminate that pregnancy, or would you support it and her and either raise it with her or ensure substantive financial support to do so?â
4 Likes
Oh yes, the horror. Imagine the horror of being a fifteen-year-old girl attacked by a seventeen-year-old boy.
4 Likes
You beat me to it.
If he did this, he was definitely not wearing a condom nor had he had a vasectomy. Accidental doesnât seem to be quite the right word. Otherwise I like the question.
1 Like
Lest we forget, Thomas played the race card after Anita Hillâs testimony. He was a victim of âhigh tech lynchingâ.
Confederate senators found that blacks in their states wanted Thomas confirmed.
1 Like
I turned on Rachael Maddowâs show just now and the very first words i heard were " pubic hair". ⌠It took me a moment to realize what i was seeing was Anita Hill testifying at Judge Thomasâs confirmation hearings. Iâve now over loaded. The tv will remain off for the evening
Dems who clearly demonstrated they had no problem digging deep. Remember watching Anita Hill with disgust at the abuse she faced. Donât think Kavanaugh has a clue how much fury folks like Harris and Booker can bring. Privileged white boy canât be protected and his deflections wonât play. First rule for witness: keep your mouth shut and only answer the question. So arrogant he broke that rule, canât inbreak it.
1 Like
Agree, but I donât think he can back away from his flat out denial. I think the Ds - among other things - have to build a strong case that he was an habitual drunk, and a dangerous one. At that. They can start with his own senior picture/commentary and that of his friend, Judge, who has incriminated himself as a believable witness with his own self descriptions and later writings as an alcoholic. Iâm also surprised that the Ds havenât insisted that the 65 Kavenaugh letter signers be subpoenaed to be at the hearing and be prepared to testify.
No, thatâs called empathy. A higher emotional order than the GOP is able to muster. If more folks had it instead of âI got mine suckerâ mentality weâd be in a much better place.
2 Likes
I hope there will be a surprise witness: The nun whom that young Catholic girl went to after she was attacked. After years of covering up for these âgood Christian boysâ and pedophile priests, some of our older retired Sisters are ready to tell all. Francis asked them to come forward last week and I believe what they have to say will be heard and believed.
How many young girls were forced to have children back in the day after a rape and talked into giving up their babies without telling who their rapist was? Many were told their babies died when they were in reality given to childless couples without the permission on the young mother.
Itâs time to stop treating abused women like objects that must manipulated for the good of others instead of human beings.
7 Likes
Telling that MO Republican senator called for waiting committee vote before McCaskall. They know this goose is cooked and theyâre on the menu come November.
2 Likes
Republicans canât run a government. Theyâre costing the middle class a fortune!
3 Likes
Thatâs why this is potentially very explosive. If he had left any wiggle room, say to acknowledge that an encounter with her happened, but his recollection is totally different from hers, she was coming onto him or whatever, then heâd be in a much âsaferâ place.
This is where I think his experience as a lawyer and judge hurt him. From a legal standpoint, with no forensic evidence and 35 years between, his safest legal answer is probably what he did-- deny any contact whatsoever. With nobody able to give any concrete evidence to the contrary, doubt any prosecutor would touch that.
But politically, it makes it charged. Now, all that the other side really has to establish is that the two were at the same party, and potentially in the same room, and his credibility is shot.
4 Likes
Why?