"She was like, 'I can’t deal with this. If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country. I cannot live in this country if he’s in the Supreme Court'... She wanted out."
Said Russell Ford, the husband of Christine Blasey Ford, quoted in "Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford moved 3,000 miles to reinvent her life. It wasn’t far enough" (WaPo).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
343 comments:
1 – 200 of 343 Newer› Newest»Trump she could live with.
If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country.
If everyone who threatened to move to another country every time a Republican was elected/appointed actually did so, the entire Northeast would be empty. (California, too.)
Richard Epstein lays into her. podcast
More lies. She started with the therapist in 2012 when Romney was the candidate and Kavanaugh was mentioned.
This woman has a history of leftist activism and has handlers that maneuvered the timing to try to delay the vote,
VOTE !
15 minutes and counting down...
Cuckold
Of course it wasn't far enough.
No matter where you go, there you are.
Kavanaugh wasn’t mentioned until he was the nominee. Her therapist says 4 guy’s attached her and they are now “high profile” guys in DC.
No mention of Kavanaugh in the therapists notes. 4 guys attacked her.
Why were the Ford’s in marriage therapy?
If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country.
Canada has all the whack jobs it needs. Take a number and have a seat.
"Said Russell Ford, the husband"
Well, they've gotten all the actors in this farce to deliver their well-rehearsed scripted lines.
As to the promise of moving out of the country if [fill the name of the terrible event that lefties don't like] comes to pass, I've yet to see any of them, like, actually move out of the country.
How manipulative is it to tell your husband you were attacked in high school for the first time in marriage therapy after you’ve been married for 10 years.
What kind of person does that?
Why were the Ford’s in marriage therapy?
Probably alcoholism.
“I’m leaving the country if” take 532.
But they’re all still here.
@gspencer: From your lips to God's ears.
She wants the FBI to probe Kavanaugh’s teenage years. How much he drank and who he fucked.
But she won’t release all of her therapists notes. No one gets to prove her life. How much she drank and who she fucked.
I don’t see a bunch of people coming forward to support her character. Any of her former boyfriends submitting affidavits to say what a swell girl she was?
Manipulative.
Epstein agrees it is a delay tactic.
Now the Democrats are bringing in the pedophiles to support their case.
"How manipulative is it to tell your husband you were attacked in high school for the first time in marriage therapy after you’ve been married for 10 years."
Where does it say "for the first time"?
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know.
Another leftist who promised to leave and never left.
Trust me honey - the feeling is mutual. We'd like you to move to another county, too.
Since when is California not another country?
3,000 miles is not enough.
You need one hundred thousand miles, and a spaceship that knows which way to go.
IF ONLY all who said they'd leave the country if Trump got elected had actually GONE! We all offered to buy their one-way tickets, too. Drama queens all.
Becomes Clear that SC seats is the prize in the capture of the institutions to dominate culture.
And they've been at this for century or more.
How do you hold someone accountable for a mis-step in life when it happened so long ago, in another era, in the teenage land of stupidity? Where she was 15 and partaking in that stupidity, too.
She might be telling some version of the truth, but the "he almost killed me!" is all manufactured.
If this was so important, why didn't Feinstein let us know sooner?
Oh right - to give red-state D's cover.
This is all BS.
She's the one who says she didn't tell anyone until the therapist in 2012. No one is making assumptions about that.
I go back and forth in my speculations about whether the Fords were in marriage counseling because she was frigid or promiscuous.
Mostly, I think the reason for the marriage counseling was that she was frigid.
Today, though, it seems to me more that she was cuckolding him.
When leftists feel raped by Trump but would gladly suck Bill Clinton's dick as a "thank you", it's hard to take these people seriously.
When Keith Ellison's accuser is being treated like dirt by these same leftists, it's rather difficult to buy into their hysteria.
Isn't this mansplaining? When are we going to hear from her?
Michael Moore is the latest to threaten to leave the country if his movie tanks. So far, so good.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
Remember the Satanic day-care scare of the '80s? I'll bet every parent who testified against the owners believed what they said as well.
They were delusional, and so is she.
Go back to the Romans and borrow their phrase, "Cui bono." There's your answer.
"I'd have to say her."
Yes, we know, we have known that for quite a while.
Only the crazies believe her now. The last thing that is going to change that mindset is a he said she said tv show.
AA: "I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
Kirsten Gillibrand: "I Believe Her Because She’s Telling the Truth."
Evidence? We don't need no stinkin' evidence.
Her mind-set was, 'I’ve got this terrible secret.... What am I going to do with this secret?"
Oh my God he went for second base.
Thankfully I was wearing my bathing suit.
But the secrecy and the shame! How can I go on?
I will move to California and start over.
Oh no! My past has caught up with me!
I must move farther away. Canada, perhaps, or New Zealand. I definitely want to move to some place where there are a lot of white people. Not that I would ever say that out loud.
Oh no! Another secret!
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
The mask drops. So much for neutrality!
The Washington Post headline also reminds me of this piece of wisdom:
"Wherever you go, there you are."
-- B. Banzai
(I'm also reminded of someone else who moved 3,000 in an attempt to escape their past. Geoffrey Macdonald, who slaughtered his wife and three kids (one in utero) in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He moved to San Diego, in an apartment overlooking the Pacific. Always sunny and beautiful, and a long way from a small multi-family housing on a Marine base in eastern N.C.)
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
Your key phrase is "closer to".
Kavanaugh's problem is that he can't admit to anything. The most innocuous story will be seen as proof of her most serious allegations. "Closer to" could be "I was at a party and tripped and knocked her over and it was pretty embarrassing." That's closer to her story than "I have never done anything like what the accuser describes -- to her or to anyone" but it's still a long long long long way from "I'm an unsuccessful rapist."
Can we settle on this one aspect of FEMINIST ...
Aggressive defense of own passivity to maintain victimhood.
Dialectic of agency nonagency
So now we have Kavanaugh Derangement Syndrome? Why not just cut to the chase and call it Conservative Derangement Syndrome (CDS)? That way, it works whenever it seems certain a conservative may gain power. People suffering from CDS are inherently victims, and thus are required to be heard from, because nothing makes for exciting news then listening to a deranged person.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
On the flip side, my lovely spouse (female, 67 yo and blonde), thinks Ford is a lying sack of ...."
I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know.
Female solidarity but the females on CNN's focus group did not agree with you.
Remember the Satanic day-care scare of the '80s? I'll bet every parent who testified against the owners believed what they said as well.
The day care thing was the first national hysteria. The "Recovered Memories" thing was later. When I was at Dartmouth in 1994-95, I saw a copy of "The Courage to Heal" which fed the hysteria. About that time, I heard an account from a father whose daughter had bulimia and got therapy at Dartmouth health services. There she got fed the recovered memories thing and ruined his family.
I think that may well be what is going on with this woman. That assumes she is not lying.
I suspect the therapy was alcohol related because that is such a common story with older women.
Women this psychologically fragile are terrible role models. Can you imagine Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir acting like this?
What with all the women’s intuition and such.
"That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know."
Read in context with previous Althouse thoughts:
"Now, since we're not going to hear of the specific time and place of the incident, Kavanaugh will need to say that he never, in that entire period, experienced alcohol-induced amnesia. (And what if he can only say I have no memory of losing my memory?!)."
"He could be asked about his problems with alcohol-induced amnesia, his observation of Kavanaugh's drinking, and any alcohol-induced amnesia he saw in Kavanaugh, and he could be pressured to admit that he's unreliable as a witness to the nonoccurrence of any event from his heavy-drinking years."
"When is it okay to shout "Fire!" and cause a panic? …When it's not a real fire, but a political situation, who's to say the perception of a smoldering fire is wrong?"
Althouse is OK with peoples' lives being turned upside down to give credence to her feeling.
My take: I wish Althouse would accomplish this by simply stating that she would like Ford to state her story under oath.
I have great respect for Althouse's intellect, but this story is -- to use an analogy I used before -- the grinding of conflicting tectonic plates beneath her feet.
I am Laslo.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know."
Hypothetical: Let's suppose Kavanaugh attempted to cop a feel in high school in 1982. Would a singular high school event of that nature disqualify him from the SCOTUS in your view?
Where do you set the bar as a legal scholar and feminist?
Ann, I am a long-time lurker. I started reading your blog when the Wisc. statehouse was occupied and you posted pictures. I am surprised to see you saying your believe she is most likely to be telling the truth. Why? Does Meade agree with you?
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
-- What makes her more likely than him? It's an honest question; I've asked other people and it generally comes down to "no one would lie about this" and "he just seems scummy." Neither of which have been too convincing to me.
"She was like, 'I can’t deal with this. If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country. I cannot live in this country if he’s in the Supreme Court'... She wanted out."
Yeah, and isn't that just the same typical sorry-ass liberal crap we hear all the time. You're losers, liberal losers. I don't want to hear your personal problems, liberal losers.
Frigid + alcoholic = loosen up when sozzled.
Treatments could be mutually contrary : is that a given ?
I think that the best evidence that we have right now about the drunken party is the marriage counselor's notes (as reported by the newspaper article).
Ford was about 17 or 18 years old, and she was alone with four drunk guys.
I think she too was very drunk.
Somehow this exciting orgy ended very badly for her.
Her own initial voluntary involvement explains why she did not tell anyone about the incident soon afterwards. After she sobered up, she felt very ashamed of herself. She did not tell even her closest girlfriend.
For years afterwards, she stewed about the incident and had recurring dreams -- hundreds of recurring dreams -- in which she subconsciously elaborated and distorted her memory of the incident.
As she dreamed recurrently about the incident, she felt sexually excited and morally ashamed. Eventually her conflicts put her into marriage counseling with her husband.
"I think that the best evidence that we have right now about the drunken party is the marriage counselor's notes (as reported by the newspaper article)."
-- Except Ford says that several parts of the therapist's notes are flat out wrong.
Amy Coney Barrett
I think something happened to Ford when she was at a party somewhere in Maryland at some time in the early eighties. That’s as far as I can go. I do believe people have false memories about much of their past. They fill in the gaps and then believe that happened.
I don't wish any of my friends, who became cops, had done so - because of who they were as kids. I picture them, in their white outfits and sitcom-informed outlooks, deciding their the ones who should keep the rest of us in our place, and I cringe.
I can see a woman feeling the same way about her rapist, for sure.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
Look at Kavanaugh's life since the alleged gang rape and torture(sarc). He is above reproach. A multitude of women have come forward to vouch for him. Subordinates, friends, and acquaintances. Not a soul of his contacts have vilified him.
Ford? Not much, if anything. And it's untouchable to peruse. Why? She is woman.
So men, just shut up.
I'd have an easier time believing Ford's accusations if there was someone...anyone...who vouched for her story in any way. What high school girl - or boy for that matter - goes to a party alone? Even if there was some sort of male omerta at work here, what about her girlfriends? I get why she didn't tell her parents, police, etc. But where are the other females from the party who could at minimum say that Ford left in distress? Or even recall the party in the first place.
"I think something happened to Ford when she was at a party somewhere in Maryland at some time in the early eighties. That’s as far as I can go. I do believe people have false memories about much of their past. They fill in the gaps and then believe that happened."
I don't think so, I think this was all part of a plan.
dreams said...
"Yeah, and isn't that just the same typical sorry-ass liberal crap we hear all the time."
Ideologues should keep something in from of them that reminds them they're crazy.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
How can Kavanaugh's "truth" be evaluated when there are no details of the event for him to answer to?
Or: how can Ford's "truth" be evaluated when there are no details of the event of her accusation?
Althouse has insinuated 'amnesia' regarding Kavanaugh and Judge (see quotes in my previous comment) in regards to a story where the ACCUSER cannot remember beyond generalities.
She is on the wrong side of Kafka on this one.
I am Laslo.
"Or: how can Ford's "truth" be evaluated when there are no details of the event of her accusation?"
-- There are details. And the ones offered that are verifiable, have been shot down (the other witnesses say it never happened.) The only things we can verify are in Kavanaugh's favor.
I have no idea who is telling a version closer to the truth, but I deeply believe that if she is so affected by what she described, there is something deeper in her that needs help. A normal healthy person could see it as a teenage interaction lived through, lesson learned, move on. It shouldn't be still so traumatizing for her, we all have close calls and scary incidents that happen to us as we grow up, and if we can't move past them, that is a sign there is something more going on.
Look it, the commie pinko lefties knew what they were doing here. Present a charge that cannot be disproved. This isn't rocket surgery.
"I'd have to say her."
I’m picturing a two dimensional space with the x-axis being the “it was/wasn’t Kavenaugh scale”, and the y-axis being the “nothing happened/it happened exactly as she said” scale.
I’m firmly in either the innoncent or least severe quadrant, as I think most people are.
Options:
1. She’s a super left lady that is doing a political hit job that was primed if Romney nominated him for the court, but was delayed till Trumps nomination.
2. She mentioned nothing to anyone, until there was a chance of his nomination, because of morality.
3. She drank a lot and partied hard, memories from 35 year ago are a bit vague, and something like this kinda happened, and her awareness / anger of the nominee’s politics, marriage stress, and she remembered more details that made her a victim that her a heroine and reduced her stress. She had found somebody to blame, just like Forest Gump and Jonson...
“It's just this war and that lying son of a bitch, Johnson!”
Since nothing else has come up on the nominee, I believe option 2 or 3.
And she has already gained from this accusation, she saved her marriage.
Very suspicious Feinstein won’t release the letter...
MayBee said...
I have no idea who is telling a version closer to the truth, but I deeply believe that if she is so affected by what she described, there is something deeper in her that needs help. A normal healthy person could see it as a teenage interaction lived through, lesson learned, move on. It shouldn't be still so traumatizing for her, we all have close calls and scary incidents that happen to us as we grow up, and if we can't move past them, that is a sign there is something more going on.
I've been thinking the same thing - there is something else going on with this woman - this is really not normal. A stranger tried to grab me in a dark parking lot when I was in high school in the early 80's. He already had his pants unzipped! I shutter to think what would have happened to me if I hadn't gotten away. But I've moved on, it hasn't crippled me. And other women who've suffered worse have moved on. I suspect this woman has other, deeper problems.
"There are details. And the ones offered that are verifiable, have been shot down."
Correct. I should've said 'there are few details'.
But I do believe there was a second groper on the Grassy Knoll.
I am Laslo.
"Very suspicious Feinstein won’t release the letter..."
-- Except, apparently, to the media, since they were able to track down the other people she named in the letter.
Manic-depressive disorder (aka bipolar disorder) commonly begins in the late teens.
In the manic phases, nymphomania is common.
The manic phases are followed by severe depression.
Ford's weird behavior indicates to me that she is manic-depressive.
In this YouTube video, a psychiatrist named Robin Mohilner describes her own initial experiences with bipolar disorder in her late teens. Beginning at 9:05 in the video, she tells how she called all the boys in her high-school class one by one and offered to have sex with them.
Ask DiFi why she didn't didn't ask Kavanaugh about this charge while he was sitting across from her in her office. What changed? I will tell you. His nomination was going to get approved.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
So the Dem's tactic is working on some.
I had a false complaint filed against me, and even though everyone in leadership and HR knew it was false, and that was it filed to take focus off the employee's misconduct, and even thought I was totally exonerated, it was disgusting and I was treated like sh!t. And the employee in question? It worked - she is still here, collecting your tax dollars, virtually untouchable. People ask me why I don't want to move up in the organization, or why I am looking at other agencies. It is because I don't want to work with spineless fu@ks Who only make decisions based on how they feel or how it looks. It isn't about doing the right thing, it is about doing what they think looks good.
Ann, you are looking at it wrong: You think she has much to lose. In reality, she has much to gain - validation that her past immorality is now serving a purpose, glory to the cause she believes in, and a perverse notoriety that she claims she does not want, but is obviously exactly what she wants in her foggy, fu@ked up mind. What greater feeling is there, than to be beautified by those around her?
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
You're slacking, Althouse. Better ratchet that cruel neutrality back up a notch or two. There are standards we've come to expect around here.
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know.
I believe you. You also "feel" that 25% of the women who attended the institution you spent your career at were raped. But as a trained lawyer and a college professor, you're supposed to be able to set your feelings aside and think rationally. Your total inability to do so concerning anything touching upon womanhood is why I support the repeal of the 19th Amendment.
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know."
Well, I'm leaning the other way - more so now than before. As stated above, I had my own traumatic near-rape in high school. So you can't accuse me of not understanding.
If you are going to accuse a man, and destroy his career and reputation, you have to have more to say than we've heard thus far. That she doesn't remember where or when, and the other people she thinks were there don't have any memory of this thing happening - then I say there isn't enough to hang the guy over, even metaphorically
"I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her."
A likely story, as my Mom used to say.
I would like to see the therapist's full records.
Althouse is reacting as academic feminists react.
Normal people, Like the CNN focus group don't agree. Imagine how embarrassing it was that CNN chose six women who they assumed would agree with Ann, and then all of them called bullshit.
At least they had the integrity to broadcast it.
Humperdink said...
"Look it, the commie pinko lefties knew what they were doing here."
Yes, but you still have to differentiate her from the party. At least, if you're sane. DiFi is the activist here, trying to stay relevant to The Resistance, who want her out of a job.
This country has some dark closets, it doesn't want looking into, that's for sure.
If you are going to accuse a man, and destroy his career and reputation, you have to have more to say than we've heard thus far.
Fuck him. He's probably a splooge stooge anyway.
What is happening here doesn't feel 'just' to me. It feels crazy. If this woman has a charge to make against a nominee, she should get up and make it. Or stand down and hold her peace. Her choice. But I'm getting sick of all the game playing.
Your total inability to do so concerning anything touching upon womanhood is why I support the repeal of the 19th Amendment.
Me too, although my wife and even my ex-wife agree that it is bullshit.
Humperdink said...
"Ask DiFi why she didn't didn't ask Kavanaugh about this charge while he was sitting across from her in her office."
See? You know what's going on - but you're still attacking this woman for DiFi's sins. That's not right or helpful.
Ideologues are crazy.
Fuck him. He's probably a splooge stooge anyway.
I was not impressed with him as a tough guy. He looked like just the sort to "Grow in Office" like Kennedy..
Now, I expect him, like Thomas, to be a reliable conservative. He has seen the elephant, as Civil War soldiers said about combat,
LilyBart said...
"If this woman has a charge to make against a nominee, she should get up and make it."
In this insane environment? Am I the only person who knows y'all are crazy?
Neo has an interesting piece on her blog called ‘It’s Like Having An Argument with Your Crazy Girlfriend: the Latest from Ford”https://www.thenewneo.com/. Humperdinck: I’m also 67, female, occasionally blond and I agree with your wife.
Mary H: I’m also curious what Meade thinks, I’m always curious about what Meade thinks!
This is about abortion & guns not Kavanaugh ... Libs will "Bork" any conservative nominee to SCOTUS.
Michael K said...
"I expect him, like Thomas, to be a reliable conservative."
I don't. He's not a black conservative, grateful to his "white" benefactors for the job, but just another nominee:
If he's like the rest, he'll change as soon as he puts on the robe, which means this whole fight is over nothing.
Can’t wait for this women’s drama to end next week. It’s eating up way too many posts on this blog. Post after post and nothing ever gets resolved.
Post after post and nothing ever gets resolved.
Nothing will ever be resolved or proved. She's made an unprovable charge against this man. He's denied it utterly. Either he will be confirmed, and her 'supporters' will forever and always say that we have a rapist on the court, or he will be tossed aside and his 'supporters' will say that he was railroaded and destroyed with a weak and unprovable accusation - a decent man destroyed.
For what little of facts that Ms. Ford has stated, I would not doubt that something of the kind might have happened to her, but pumping it up into a life-changing traumatic near escape from forcible rape is something else.
And in any case it does not excuse the behavior of Diane Feinstein et al.
In my blog about the movie Dirty Dancing I wrote a nine-part series of articles titled Eleanor Bergstein and Sylvia Plath.
* Bergstein wrote the script of Dirty Dancing and of a couple other movies. She also has published two novels.
* Plath was a poet who was married to famous poet Ted Hughes and who committed suicide in February 1963.
Bergstein is married to a poet, Michael Goldman, who teaches literature at Princeton University.
The first biographies of Plath were published in 1971, about the same time when Bergstein finished writing her first novel. I speculate that Bergstein read those biographies and became fascinated by Plath. Not only were both women married to poets, they both (I think) suffered from manic-depressive disorder.
Consideration of manic-depressive disorder provides much insight to Bergstein's first two movies -- It's My Turn and Dirty Dancing and her second novel -- Ex-Lover.
My blog's nine-part series argues that Baby Houseman, the heroine of Dirty Dancing, suffers from manic-depressive disorder, Type 2.
======
In a previous comment of this thread, I wondered whether the Fords' marriage counseling happened because she was frigid or promiscuous.
If she is manic-depressive, then she is frigid during her depressive phases and is promiscuous during her manic phases.
In this insane environment? Am I the only person who knows y'all are crazy?
When what in the hell do you think should happen? Toss the guy because someone wrote a letter about an unprovable and uncorroborated event of 36 years ago?
LilyBart said...
What is happening here doesn't feel 'just' to me. It feels crazy. If this woman has a charge to make against a nominee, she should get up and make it. Or stand down and hold her peace. Her choice. But I'm getting sick of all the game playing.
Totally agree. What is going on right now feels crazy.
I had a guy follow me home in his car once after cheerleading at a game. I noticed it, so I stopped at my friends house so she and her mom could follow me home, and the guy and the car were waiting for me at the end of the block. He followed me a little bit until he realized the other car was now with me. Scary, right? Scary what could have been. But it wasn't, and I'm ok
My sister woke up in the middle of the night to find a man standing over her bed with a pair of her underwear in his hands. It was scary, but she got over it.
Men get jumped or punched in bars, told by angry women that their penises are small, and injured in all kinds of ways. Most of them get over it.
As I've grown any of the things that happened to me have fallen away. The only things that can still stop my heart are the things that almost happened to my kids.
If what she described actually happened, it seems a pretty mild thing to have negatively influenced her life. What a delicate, emotionally unbalanced person, it seems.
I suspect it's merely a false memory contrived to explain her relationship problems later in life, probably going to couples therapy for intimacy "issues". What better way to inflate its importance in her life than to assign very successful and "powerful" men to it.
Given what we know about her girls school (from the yearbooks that have mysteriously been removed from the web by the school), it was a girls version of Animal House, it should be viewed as child-abuse for her parents to have kept her there.
Humperdink said..."Ask DiFi why she didn't didn't ask Kavanaugh about this charge while he was sitting across from her in her office."
Crack responded: "See? You know what's going on - but you're still attacking this woman for DiFi's sins. That's not right or helpful."
Say what????? Where did you get that? Oh never mind.
Declaring that she will leave the USA because of Kavanaugh nomination was not a joke.
Rather, the declaration was a manic action during a manic phase of her manic-depressive disorder.
“Althouse has insinuated 'amnesia' regarding Kavanaugh and Judge (see quotes in my previous comment) in regards to a story where the ACCUSER cannot remember beyond generalities.”
Althouse has flat out assumed that Kavanaugh got black out drunk just like Judge did. Judge’s book only insinuates that a character perhaps modeled on Kavanaugh got puking drunk. There is a difference! People who drink too often find themselves worshipping at the porcelain god. This can be a one off experience. Blackout drinking is a much later stage in problem drinking. Yet it is important for smear merchants like Althouse to project the worst of Judge onto the judge.
Blogger The Crack Emcee said... DiFi is the activist here, trying to stay relevant to The Resistance, who want her out of a job.
Exactly. DiFi was not endorsed this year by the party. She's flexing her guns to get the millennial crazies to back the fuck off of her old porcelain ass.
"If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country."
He has been nominated so I suppose she is leaving.
And I agree with other posters that these indulged activists always threaten to move to a first world, white English speaking country. They never threaten to move to, say, Khazakstan or Burma. Racists.
In this insane environment?
Why is the environment insane? what or who is making it insane?
I believe Ford was drunk at a party (may, in fact), and she hooked up with boys. I believe that she an Kavanaugh may have been at some of the same parties, and maybe they even shared a drunken hook up. I don't believe that Kavanaugh "attacked" or "sexually assaulted" Ford in the way she describes in her fragmented memories. At most, it sounds like they may have shared a typical 80's failed hook up. To be clear, I do NOT believe he held her down or put his hand over her mouth - that seems completely out of character for the person he is today and whom others have defended him to be. Even if they shared a clumsy, drunken hook up, I don't care. No one's perfect. The 80's were a different time. I know - I was there. Even if anything happened (which is doubtful) I feel the episode has no bearing on his suitability to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.
I think she and the Democrats are trying to make something out of nothing. Their motives are extremely transparent. They just want to delay and derail the vote. I'm honestly shocked that anyone without a political ax to grind would be unable to see through the obvious bullshit. You would have to be pretty naive and simpleminded to believe it.
The whole thing is a travesty and a national embarrassment. I wish the Republicans would stop being so weak and playing into these devious and damaging games the Democrats and press play with politics and people's lives. Call the bluff and have the freaking vote. We (they) must put an end to these 11th hour dramatics and shameful politics of personal destruction. Its time shut down the bullies. Ugh! It all makes me so angry!
Hagar said...
For what little of facts that Ms. Ford has stated, I would not doubt that something of the kind might have happened to her, but pumping it up into a life-changing traumatic near escape from forcible rape is something else.
This is what I'm starting to believe happened (my theory) - something happened that was rather innocuous, but made her feel uncomfortable. Over the years, she's made it into something more than it really was in her mind. This would explain why nobody remembers it happening (because it wasn't a 'thing'), and why she can't remember key details (where / when) - because it wasn't really traumatic at the time. Maybe she gets into modern day academia and they talk about men and 'assault' and she thinks about this time when she was uncomfortable and says to herself - yeah! that happened to me too! And she's built it up in her mind, and used it to explain why she's struggling in the mid years of her life.
Just a theory, but it would explain a lot.
Would it help if Kavanaugh stated at Monday's hearing that he identified as a woman in high school? (Asking for a friend.)
Blogger Mike Sylwester said...
Declaring that she will leave the USA because of Kavanaugh nomination was not a joke.
Rather, the declaration was a manic action during a manic phase of her manic-depressive disorder.
Absolutely. It also goes to why she was targeted by Bart and Judge for their drunken clumsy smoothering and groping: she has always been a bit of a mental case and they picked on the weakest of the herd.
Sorry, I should provide a trigger warning when making realpolitik comments rather than the obligitory ideological reacharound you guys cum to expect.
"She's the one who says she didn't tell anyone until the therapist in 2012. No one is making assumptions about that."
I think there was a miscommunication between Althouse and the original comment- the original can easily be read, and would be read in isolation, as "attacked for the first time in high school". However, context is everything, in my opinion, and I think such a reading is kind of obtuse if you know the story we are discussing.
@LilyBart
That is not a bad theory. In the TItle IX kangaroo court litigation, it is common for a young woman to be persuaded by others months, sometimes years, later that what happened was not only a thing but an assault. What was not a thing becomes "HE COULD HAVE KILLED ME!! SHRIEK SHRIEK SHRIEK."
Women this psychologically fragile are terrible role models. Can you imagine Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir acting like this?
Thank you.
How about if Kavanaugh said he paid for a classmate's abortion? Claims he will go full bore (ha) after the NRA (ala old Harv)?
So Althouse believes CBF? A clear Leftist loon who wanted to move to another country if Kavanaugh gets confirmed. I guess that only leaves Canada because she is afraid to fly.
Be prepared for the biggest legal beatdown in history next week. Kavanaugh cleared. Katz goes crazy trying to obj3ct.
It will be epic.
Do we even know if she was a boarding or a day student?
I took a girl's luggage into the boarding dorm of a (mostly day) girls' school on the other side of DC in the late 70's. On the door across the hall was a male centerfold with an erection. I was the embarrassed shrinking violet. My mother was ten feet behind me!
Looks like the "creamy hippie-chick center" filling has filled up the professor's cranial cavity.
Still a better love story than Twilight tho.
Howard makes sense.
DiFi was not endorsed this year by the party. She's flexing her guns to get the millennial crazies to back the fuck off of her old porcelain ass.
Then he doesn't and seems to buy the leftist activists's story. Why am I not surprised?
paywall - ugh
WSJ:
The Presumption of Guilt
The new liberal standard turns American due process upside down
Be prepared for the biggest legal beatdown in history next week
I hope. We still have not heard from the PGA. I wonder what that is about ?
The only focus of this hostess is her blog. She is lives to play laser pointer tag with her commenter pets. It is all and everything about the vortex.
She is still stuck back in her classroom.
Cruel neutrality has become a banal and fictitious trademark.
Pity.
For this long time reader it may well be time to move 3000 miles away to an internet free zone or at least to Canada.
This is what I'm starting to believe happened (my theory) - something happened that was rather innocuous, but made her feel uncomfortable
How about this? I believe it is at least as likely:
Ford was attracted to Kavanagh and fantasized about a relationship with him, but he never even noticed her. Part of this fantasy is one very common to women, the sexual aggressor (or even outright rapist) sweeping her off her feet and ripping her clothes off. (Your average bodice-ripper anyone?) Over the years, and with the help of therapists, this becomes a "memory".
I assume identifying Kavanaugh is a flat out lie by Ford. For me, the only details that matter for adjudicating this are the missing details that Ford claims to not remember- the location, a rough date like month and year, and how she got to and from the party. She can be 100% sure it was Kavanaugh, but can't remember these other details- the sorts of details that might allow Kavanaugh to completely refute the charge?
Location: if she remembered this, the person who hosted the party would be identified and could be asked whether or not it took place;
Month and year of attack: if she remembered this, it runs the risk of Kavanaugh not even being in town. Kids of privilege often don't stay at home during the Summer- there are camps, interships, and the like. She couldn't take the risk that Kavanaugh coming out and proving he was in NYC during the entire Summer of whatever year she chose;
Transportation to and from the party: to claim to remember this, she would have to have that person/s support, and no such person has come forward to date, either. It would be just another point of potential falsification, and a risky one since it would have to be a good acquaintance of Ms. Ford.
To take this further, all the people she so far claims were there have denied it, but those people are, curiously, all friends of Kavanaugh- so their denials can be more easily denigrated as self-serving.
I am sorry, there is literally no rational reason to believe Ford's story at all.
Headline of the post: "I've Got This Terrible Secret ..."
Usually when someone utters this phrase, they have done something awful. Not the other way around.
I find this odd.
I am sorry, there is literally no rational reason to believe Ford's story at all.
Sadly, these days that doesn't matter.
“If Trump becomes president, I’m leaving the country.”
“If Kavanaugh gets on the Suoreme Court, I’m leaving the country.”
Do any of these people actually leave?
Can’t wait for this women’s drama to end next week. It’s eating up way too many posts on this blog. Post after post and nothing ever gets resolved.
As I've explained in discussions with a new immigrant or two to America: For women, sex is a political act.
And in America, politics are deadly serious and insane.
I wonder how the nominee obtaining counsel that specializes in defamation has affected Ford and supporters statements...
MayBee....I had a guy follow me home in his car once after cheerleading at a game. I noticed it, so I stopped at my friends house so she and her mom could follow me home, and the guy and the car were waiting for me at the end of the block. He followed me a little bit until he realized the other car was now with me. Scary, right? Scary what could have been. But it wasn't, and I'm ok
My sister woke up in the middle of the night to find a man standing over her bed with a pair of her underwear in his hands. It was scary, but she got over it.
Very Scary! I'm glad you guys are ok.
Ann Althouse at 9:39 AM
... if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth ... I'd have to say her.
Did she really believe that Kavanaugh might kill her?
For once, (or maybe twice, like a stopped clock), chickie perhaps overcomes his fear of biology at 10:45 to hit on a relevant fact:
Alcohol, AFAIK (from friends, of course - or MedPage), is actually more associated with impotence than performance.
lilyBart- It was all a looooong time ago. Glad you are ok.
It’s obvious, and has been terribly obvious all along, that destroying Kavanaugh is only about protecting abortion rights for women and derailing Republican-appointed SCOTUS nominees. Even Althouse is sympathetic to this goal (see her post a few days ago). It is so transparent & predictable!
Alcohol might have "fueled" Bart O'Kavanaugh's poor judgment, and I don't know enough to deny that it could be implicated in frat parties that get out of hand. But in all likelihood the same alcohol that might have clouded his (and her?) perception that he was going too far also thankfully contributed to his falling over and more effectively quickly forgetting about carrying through with what he didn't know he was trying to do.
If he's like the rest, he'll change as soon as he puts on the robe, which means this whole fight is over nothing.
I'm afraid so. He'll want so much to prove he really isn't that kind of guy.
Now, while it's possible alcohol clouded Kavanaugh's sexual judgment one time at age 17, it's not the explanation for what clouds his judicial and political judgements for the rest of his life. That's something for which he definitely needs to be held to account.
He forced, if you will, himself into the Merrick Garland seat.
Thanks, Ritmo! I owe you one.
For me, I have no particular like for Kavanaugh: he strikes me as a George W. Bush kinda guy. The kinda guy who could tell what a tax was from an emanting penumbra, say.
So: if her story were to have been plausible, I'd be fine with whichever course the river took.
However, her inability to remember and her unwillingness to commit to a story leaves no hook on which to hang a hat.
As such, the ruthless tearing down of people based on so little is what I find appalling.
May I suggest, people, that you put your eyes in your pocket and your nose on the ground?
I am Laslo.
Ann,
I know you like to distill a lot of your online experiences as quickly as possible by doing things like dropping down the most liked comments, but on the Post site, I actually read the comments a lot of the time, and thought this one was particularly...potent, for lack of a better word. But I'll short cut it for those used to the drive bys and shortcuts: 85% here will disagree.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/17/what-the-man-accused-of-helping-kavanaugh-assault-a-woman-wrote-about-female-sexuality/?utm_term=.d171c3b0e85a
mrs_chaos_manor said:
No one is going to MAKE UP a drunken attempted rape from high school as a ploy to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed to the Supreme Court. Anyone making up a lie could make up something easier to "prove", something more recent, less excusable as immaturity or the effects of alcohol! The only plausible reason for THIS woman to tell THIS story is actually what she claims-- that knowing what she knows about his behavior and character, she can't say nothing and let him pose successfully as a man who OUGHT to sit on that Court.
If you really believe Kavanaugh "believes in the Constitution" you are very much fooling yourself, sir or madam. I would that it were so. I'd give a great deal for a judge to sit in that seat who would uphold the Constitution as closely to "as written" as possible given historical change, hewing to the intent of the framers of the document, and preserving the government therein defined. The man currently under discussion for the Court, however, is a political operative of the worst sort, one who deliberately spreads falsehoods he knows to be false if they are politically useful, among a dozen other habits that add up to the repulsive doctrine that the "ends justify the means". A thousand times no, and if you value the Constitution you know this. I don't know if Kavanaugh understands the Constitution, but his actions show him to be one of those competent, obedient, amoral men so useful to the powerful, whose supreme good is producing the results desired by his boss and his team, whether it's a country of peaceful citizens thriving in competition with one another, or stacks of corpses marred by exit wounds at each saleable organ. Whatever his masters bid, he will work to give them, to earn their approval and reward and enjoy whatever pleasures those rewards can purchase him. The Supreme Court is no fit place for men of his sort-- it requires the best of us, and the best are never company men who do their masters' bidding.
With no proof behind the accusation, you really do have to confirm Kavanaugh- to not do so will mean that every SCOTUS nominee gets such an accusation in the future- how could it not happen since there would clearly be no consequences for a 100% foolproof method of political assassination.
As naif in matter of social hierarchy preen
what is the differential between appeal court and SC?
The article reminds me of something I read in Rolling Stone a few years back.
HT said...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/17/what-the-man-accused-of-helping-kavanaugh-assault-a-woman-wrote-about-female-sexuality/?utm_term=.d171c3b0e85a
Yes, I've seen that. Judge sounds like a toad. But I've also seem some of Ford's high school year books which the school took down from the interest (not before some enterprising person downloaded it). It seems her high school has a culture of drinking and sex. Yep, preppies were into drinking and sex fun just like Lisa Burnbaum told us in The Official Preppy Handbook.
I agree with Mike Sylwester that this woman comes across as bipolar. Personality disorders are harder to deal with than psychoses.
Matthew Sablan at 10:05 AM
Except Ford says that several parts of the therapist's notes are flat out wrong.
I think the best evidence is the therapist's written notes.
@ht: You’ve boughten into modern McCarthyism
If I had to bet, from all the fag ends, I'd say there's some truth to her story.
Interesting that Dr. Fords trauma only rised to the level of moving to another country when Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court. She was apparently OK with staying when he was only a district court judge.
This might explain why liberals are OK with Keith Ellison. He only wants to be a state AG.
@ht: You’ve boughten into modern McCarthyism
Not by a long shot. And you miss the point of the [someone else's] comment I quoted. Almost totally.
The effective scrubbing of Ford’s internet history suggests more than simple self-deletion. I smell collusion. I smell Hillary-level digital wiping.
"Anyone making up a lie could make up something easier to "prove", something more recent, less excusable as immaturity or the effects of alcohol!"
Ms. Ford couldn't make up such a story- it would be too easily disproved. What that comment is describing would have to be a different liar altogether. In any case, such a liar would face the exact same problems Ms. Ford would if she is lying- the liar would have to either be sure the "details" were accurate (Kavanaugh was at so and so location with so and so individuals along with the liar herself), or would have to rely on the same vagueness that Ford's story has so that the "details" couldn't be falsified- and here is the kicker- such a liar would have less room to be vague with a more recent example as there would also be less excuse for not having a better memory of the "details". The sort of logic being used in that comment, HT, isn't really logic at all. Liars face consequences sometimes- that comment is basically assuming there are no consequences, so any lie will do, so why one so weak in nature?
Many of us have been curious about what the Professor thinks of all this. She was kind enough to tell us. The larger question for me is, would she vote to confirm anyway? Would she be less likely to do so because of the denial? More likely if he had admitted the possibility of a youthful indiscretion?
That said, the Professor has provided a forum for us to try out our own thoughts and arguments and given us lots of interesting angles to approach convincing ourselves and others of what to make of all this. I don't know if it is cruel, but it's pretty neutral.
My own thought is that the story is not true, but there is maybe some encounter that meant a lot more to a freshman just coming on the scene than to an upperclassman who was blotto. Because the incident didn't happen the way she is telling it, his denials and those of his fellow classmates are in earnest. At some point, Kavanaugh may have even thought, "Oh my God, now I remember where I've seen her! But that's not what happened at all!" But he's screwed, too late to back down because, as has been noted above, this isn't about Kavanaugh and Ford, this is about Roe and Heller.
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
When the claims were first made, I thought the story was possible, if not probable. A drunken 17 year old Kavanaugh makes an aggressive pass at a tipsy 15 year old Blasey who was subsequently traumatized. That scene plays out all the time between adolescents who are negotiating the border between childhood and adulthood. It is a cliche. Fast Times at Ridgemont High came out in 1982. High school kids having bad, scary and uncontrolled sexual experiences was quite the trend in 1982. Just because boys getting blasted and groping girls was something of a trope does not excuse the attacker, of course, especially as described by Blasey. What I am saying is that her story sounds believable on its face, it fits with what I know of my own contemporary adolescence. Like you, I find it likely.
So, I waited for the other shoes to start dropping. I waited for either other witnesses or other victims. Because men who are prone to assault women do not stop at just one. (cf. Wienstein, Cosby, Laurer, etc.) And high school reputations are fairly durable. If you paw at girls, you become known as what used to be called a "bounder" and people tend to remember that, like an unfortunate nickname, far into the future. So far, not one girlfriend, acquaintance, or coworker has come forward to say, "Oh yeah, Kavanaugh, never get into an elevator with that guy by yourself." No male acquaintance or classmate has come forward and said, "Ol' Brett and I used to bird dog chicks all the time when we were on Spring Break; he always said tequila was the best for getting those panties off 'em!" or, "Everyone at Prep knew Brett was an asshole when he got wasted." So far, there has been only crickets. And this despite there being every inducement for a left leaning person of Kavanaugh's acquaintance to come forward with a credible story.
Without any supporting evidence or rumor to suggest her story is accurate, how can I possibly believe her? Did something happen to her? Probably. Something has happened to just about all of us, on one level or the other. Was it Kavanaugh? You need evidence. How can we tell? Given the story she tells, how do we know that her memory hasn't flipped Kavanaugh and Judge's roles around? Memory is a tricky thing. A 35 year old memory, told and retold to yourself over that whole time, is even trickier. Maybe Judge pinned her down and Kavanaugh pulled him off. Maybe the other two phantoms in the room were the attackers. Maybe Kavanaugh was at the party and was obnoxiously hitting on her, but the attack happened elsewhere and she's conflated, over time, the experiences and the parties involved. We can't know. No one can. This is a he said-she said moment pure and simple. If Kavanaugh didn't have such a sterling reputation, I think the issue would be easier. But he is, according to everyone who the FBI has interviewed many, many times, a hyper-scrupulous paragon. He would have to be a true monster, more of a monster than he is perceived as a hero, to have done what she relates and then lie about it. I find it unlikely, but I await evidence to show me otherwise.
"Not by a long shot. And you miss the point of the [someone else's] comment I quoted. Almost totally."
And are we wrong in thinking you were agreeing with it? Yes or no?
Re: political assassination ...
False flag can also work.
@ht: First, I know that you were merely quoting someone else. Second, the person you quoted is not being subtle or profound: they are outright opposed to Kavanaugh based on insinuation and speculation — not based on fact.
The fact that you chose to quote this singular POV reflects on you and you alone.
HT,
I have seen comments on the internet, too, that claimed Ford has to be telling the truth because if she were lying, she would have made the claim that Kavanaugh did violently rape her. I am asking you this- would agree with that sort of argument?
Many of us have been curious about what the Professor thinks of all this. She was kind enough to tell us.
No she didn't. She told us how she "feels".
Gahrie aptly observes: No she didn't. She told us how she "feels".
Yes, we know that feeling is so much more valid than thinking.
Which brand of mattress will Ms. Ford be carrying on her back if she shows up to testify? Dibs on Serta!
Surprised this has not come up before..
Incidentally, the article repeats the claim her email was hacked. Then why have we seen none of her emails? Article kinds vaguely says she partied like the rest..
Mike Sylwester said...
Manic-depressive disorder (aka bipolar disorder) commonly begins in the late teens.
In the manic phases, nymphomania is common.
The manic phases are followed by severe depression.
Ford's weird behavior indicates to me that she is manic-depressive.
In this YouTube video, a psychiatrist named Robin Mohilner describes her own initial experiences with bipolar disorder in her late teens. Beginning at 9:05 in the video, she tells how she called all the boys in her high-school class one by one and offered to have sex with them.
9/22/18, 10:16 AM
How was she going to get to New Zealand, boat?
But feelings drive cultures, most assuredly as fashion does.
"This is about abortion & guns not Kavanaugh"
For once I'd like to see a prospective Justice be suspected of wanting to overturn Marbury v. Madison.
Yancey Ward -- Look at the Maryland statute for sexual assault. It delineates suffocation (hand over her mouth) and another person(s) (Mark Judge). It seems as if they referenced it when concocting her story.
@Strumpit: You remind me more and more of the Mrs. Bundybcharacter in Hitchcock’s “The Birds”.
I wish the Republicans would stop being so weak and playing into these devious and damaging games
All the Republicans are at the mercy of three Republican Senators -- Flake, Collins and Murkowski.
AA: "I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
Of course you do. Absolutely no evidence. 36 years late ( or 35 or 34 or 37,) 4 attackers then 3, then 2. "Somewhere" in Montgomery county. Of course you believe her.
It is bullshit.
All the Republicans are at the mercy of three Republican Senators -- Flake, Collins and Murkowski.
The people of Arizona, Maine and Alaska need to be removed from the population! They cannot be allowed to vote for these moderates!
She also has a history of booze and sex AND Trump Derangement Syndrome. There is a reason her internet history was scrubbed.
"The effective scrubbing of Ford’s internet history suggests more than simple self-deletion. I smell collusion. I smell Hillary-level digital wiping."
You're brain has a contusion causing a collusion illusion based on delusion confusion about deletion. You're smelling your own poo after digital insertion. Ineffective scrubbing of your rear causes the smell you infer. You are indeed a Trump-level asshole. An asswipe is a different animal altogether.
Urban Dictionary: asswipe
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=asswipe
There is a common misconception that an asswipe can be equated to an asshole. This is quite untrue. An asswipe simply doesn't care. This is usually carried out to such an extreme extent that the apathy brings misfortune to those around the asswipe.
"I agree with Mike Sylwester that this woman comes across as bipolar. Personality disorders are harder to deal with than psychoses."
I wish the issue were as simple as mental illness, but I have not seen any evidence of bipolar disorder, psychosis or personality disorder.
The simpler explanation is that she is a committed leftist who wants to derail Kavanaugh by any means possible.
The way in which this whole episode has played out is strongly suggestive of a setup similar to the Russian Collusion hoax. That is how Democrats and the Deep State operate.
Ford had recurring dreams for years of the incident she now describes as actually happening. It's very probable these recurring dreams created a "false memory" This would explain why she doesn't know when or where this incident occurred, or how she got there and how she got home. Her dreams did not supply this information.
General consensus is a minor incident, if true, blown out of proportion by Ford enough to affect her entire life.
What if it was a far more serious incident, enough to affect her forever, being minimized by Ford? Something so terrible she cannot risk the embarrassment of revelation?
"Does Meade agree with you?"
No. And yes.
Why? Because when it comes to Cruel Neutrality™ I don't play games.
"She also has a history of booze and sex AND Trump Derangement Syndrome. There is a reason her internet history was scrubbed."
I think she scrubbed her internet history so that there would be no evidence of her TDS statements and actions. I don't know about the booze and sex. That seems like speculation.
Despite the scrubbing, she contends that people have been able to get her email address and send her threatening letters. How were they able to do that and not find much else?
I looked her up on the Palo Alto U. and Stanford web-sites right after her name (and similar profession) came out. She was not listed at all. She had help in planning how to scrub her internet history. Collusion?
Payback for Merrick Garland ... Biden Rule more polite than "Borking".
Strumpit wrote: You're brain has a contusion causing a collusion illusion based on delusion confusion about deletion. You're smelling your own poo after digital insertion. Ineffective scrubbing of your rear causes the smell you infer. You are indeed a Trump-level asshole. An asswipe is a different animal altogether.
May I just add that you smell of "boiled cabbage, urine, and farts"?
What the left fails to realize - or more likely, they just don't care - is how much damage they're doing to real sexual assault victims with all this bullshit.
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
Shaking my damn head.
Our country and society is truly fucked if there are 'smart' people like you who actually believe this shit.
We're done.
Thirty six (or seven, or eight, or five) years later ... no location, no details, no nothing ... and you believe her.
good gawd
“The effective scrubbing of Ford’s internet history suggests more than simple self-deletion. I smell collusion. I smell Hillary-level digital wiping.”
Add to that that one of Katz’s demands was that Ford could not be asked about her social media presence. I do recall seeing a screen shot of a Facebook post of her in one of those pink hats.
On the flip side, my lovely spouse (female, 67 yo and blonde), thinks Ford is a lying sack of ...."
Ditto. Except mine is 48 and brunette. Twenty years of marriage.
She's embarrassed by her gender.
I suggest she begin another settlement of Jonestown. I am sure one of our commenters could supply the lethal Koolaid recipe.
I've got to admit that if I had to say right now, who is more likely to be telling us what is closer to the truth — no stakes, no burden of proof, just who is more likely — I'd have to say her.
That's how I feel right now. I'm letting you know."
I feel she is a fraudster and should be jailed. An accusation without any corroboration is at best slander and may well be criminal. She wants to testify, let her do so Monday,in an open, televised hearing under oath with a criminal perjury admonishment.
LilyBart: This is what I'm starting to believe happened (my theory) - something happened that was rather innocuous, but made her feel uncomfortable. Over the years, she's made it into something more than it really was in her mind.
That was my first basic reaction when the story first came to light (if anything happened at all).
Whether the other person involved was BK is still an open question, but given his denial, absent more evidence, a reasonable finder of fact could only conclude that the answer is that he was not involved.
All evidence points to the conclusion that Ford is a lying cunt. Whore with a political agenda. Water of human flesh. If Althouse thinks she is telling the truth, Althouse is a feminist fag hag.
Many of us have been curious about what the Professor thinks of all this. She was kind enough to tell us.
Um -- most of us already knew before she copped to it.
I am going to give Althouse the benefit of the doubt.
She feels that Christine Blasey Ford is more likely telling the truth.
Althouse is describing an emotional reaction, nothing more. She is not indicating how she has processed the available evidence and what her thoughts on the matter are.
By the way, I don't like Kavanaugh but I have no reason to think or believe or feel he is a rapist or a liar or a creep. I do, however, find it creepy of Ford & Co. to drop this particular accusation on Kavanaugh in this way at this time and place.
And I'm pretty sure anyone who wants to see the #MeTooTimesUpReckoning movement continue to pull down creeps like Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein et al. should want to not have BK's appointment derailed by any kind of dishonest unfair creepy rape-y process. Wrongly destroy one person like Kavanaugh and his family, and it will be #GameOver for the #MeToo movement.
a reasonable finder of fact could only conclude that the answer is that he was not involved.
The problem is, a significant portion of the population sees little value in reason.
Althouse is describing an emotional reaction, nothing more. She is not indicating how she has processed the available evidence and what her thoughts on the matter are.
Except that she has repeatedly expressed the idea that emotional reactions are at least as valid as reasoning, if not more so.
Drudge is reporting that she will testify - no story, just headlines.
If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country.
Bye Felicia
I didn't get the chance to read thru the comments but this is a lie.
Kavanaugh wasn't added to Trump's list until 2017. This puts her feeling these things in 2016.
Please edit your initial post to reflect this.
This whole matter is suspicious. Why give a letter to Feinstein and then not follow up and insist that her (Ford) concerns were not followed up in some matter before the letter was released to the media. Feinstein had plenty of time to talk to everyone concerned prior to the hearings took place. She could have handled herself in a way that did not seem overtly political and I would have been more sympathetic to her story. Why surround yourself with political activist lawyers if you are so sincere. I'm surprised that Gloria Allred isn't waiting in the wings. She has allowed herself to be used by the Democrats and Progressive Lawyers to ruin Kavenaugh's life. She should understand this before she cries out that she is being mistreated by the Republicans. She has allowed it. I think she is part of the smear at this point. She has had a successful professional life and she will be a hero to "the right people" if she succeeds in bringing down Kavenaugh. She has a golden opportunity to make money and make the rounds as "woman Victim" of the month. I feel like I am watching a modern version of the Salem Witch Trials. My liberal women friends are hysterical. What kind of people do this?
So Althouse believes CBF ?
I have to laugh. The acronym CBF, to me, means Cat Butt Face (*)
That pursed up disapproving, pinched face look that your mean Mother in Law or the prudish sour lady next door yelling at the kids gets. Their mouth gets pinched up into the shape of a cat's butt hole.
Actually, I envision this as being accurate for Christine Blasey Ford. Cat Butt Faced, sour, prudish liberal and probably a militant vegan to boot. Sucking the fun out of life everywhere.
It's mob rule. Mobs have no morals only blood-lust. Think in terms of rioters or a lynch mob. Things that an individual would never consider doing alone become acceptable as part of a like minded mob. Leftists are a mob.
Breaking -- Ford agrees to testify. Multiple sources.
CBF is driving. I’m going to make a sign and hang it over Interstate 80.
“CBF = LIAR.”
Post a Comment