April 26, 2019

"I cannot be satisfied by simply saying, 'I’m sorry for what happened to you. I will be satisfied when I know there is real change and real accountability and real purpose."

Said Anita Hill, after Joe Biden called her and talked to her for a long time about the hearings he chaired on the confirmation of Clarence Thomas. Quoted in the NYT. What, exactly, is Biden supposed to say about how he handled things?
[S]he cannot support Mr. Biden for president until he takes full responsibility for his conduct, including his failure to call as corroborating witnesses other women who were willing to testify before the Judiciary Committee. By leaving them out, she said, he created a “he said, she said” situation that did not have to exist....

In recent interviews, Ms. Hill and others involved in the confirmation fight portrayed Mr. Biden’s handling of the hearing as at best inept and at worst deeply insensitive. They fault his refusal to seriously investigate her accusations and take public testimony from other potential witnesses who said the future justice had acted inappropriately with them. Justice Thomas has denied any inappropriate behavior.

One of those potential witnesses, Sukari Hardnett, a lawyer in Silver Spring, Md., said in an interview that she decided to come forward while watching the hearing when she “saw what they were doing to Anita Hill and how they were literally trying to trash her.” Ms. Hardnett wrote a letter detailing her own experiences and submitted it to the committee through the dean of her law school, expecting to be called to testify. But she said she was not.

Another woman who sought to testify, Angela Wright, called Mr. Biden “pretty much useless” last year in an interview. Ms. Wright, Ms. Hartnett and one other woman, Rose Jourdain, who died in 2010, were ready to back up Ms. Hill’s account before the committee, but Mr. Biden ended the hearings before they were heard from in public. Over the years, Mr. Biden has suggested they either backed out or were reluctant.

Ms. Hill said there was “no evidence” of that. But if it is true, she said, there is a possible explanation: “They saw a flawed process where they weren’t going to be heard and they might end up being destroyed.”...

The 1991 hearings were a surreal spectacle, as senators prodded an obviously uncomfortable Ms. Hill through awkward testimony about penis size, pubic hair and a pornographic film star known as Long Dong Silver — shocking public discourse at the time. But even before the hearings began, Ms. Hill said, she was “already disappointed” in Mr. Biden....

105 comments:

Ken B said...

Oh. It was Anita Hill who was grilled about Long Dong Silver was it? How quickly they forget.

Henry said...

"Inept at best" should be Joe's campaign slogan.

Ken B said...

Was it Anita Hill whose VHS rental history was investigated?

tim maguire said...

What struck me most at the time was not the mistreatment of Anita Hill, but wonder that such petty complaints had spurred a hearing at all.

She admitted that Thomas never laid a hand on her, never propositioned her for sex and never used his position to make her doing anything she didn't want to do.

How unserious had we become that we were actually considering denying an otherwise qualified person a spot on the Supreme Court because he once said there was a pubic hair on his soda?

Meade said...

Old White Joe is welcome to call me. I could accept his apology.

If it’s sincere.

Lucid-Ideas said...

"America is an Ineptitude"

Joe's actual idea for his administration.

hombre said...

How does the NYT get the contents of a private conversation? Everything the people of the left say is for political effect. There is no reality, only words, words and more words.

Mr. D said...

How unserious had we become that we were actually considering denying an otherwise qualified person a spot on the Supreme Court because he once said there was a pubic hair on his soda?

He was alleged to have said. Don't believe there was any corroboration.

Ken B said...

Tim McGuire gives an accurate summary.
There were some striking arguments made at the time Catherine McKinnon agreed that there was no evidence of any pattern of abuse but that didn’t prove anything “because he isn’t dead yet”. I am out paraphrasing that quote. Unable to prove there was no abuse in the future he stood condemned in her eyes.
He was asked about his video rental history. Democrats tried to get his library borrowing history.
Hill followed him when he changed jobs, after the alleged coke can incident.

gahrie said...

Anita Hill was no more believable than CBF. They both lied for exactly the same reason.

Bruce Hayden said...

“He was alleged to have said. Don't believe there was any corroboration.”

But it is important to believe the survivors.

Shouting Thomas said...

Marxist feminism in action in reality. Show trials. Guilt proven by accusation. Unpersonning. Forced confessions.

But, I'm sure Althouse will tell us, real feminism has never been tried.

Marxist feminists always say that.

This is not the Marxist feminism that would lead us to Utopia if only Althouse were in charge.

Ken B said...

Has Althouse ever mentioned pubic hair on this blog? So much for her chances on the USSC.

gilbar said...

????
But, isn't it A PROVEN FACT?
That he RAPED girls in high school? Or, at least went to parties? Or, at least people SAID he did?
That he Molested girls in college? Or, at least drank beer? Or, at least people SAID he did?
I mean, it was just in the papers, wasn't it? I can't tell these Republican judges apart

Amadeus 48 said...

Anita Hill will never go away. She'll always be the victim. Even if what she said was true, wasn't she just trying to destroy Thomas?

She did a bad thing to Thomas, and now she is trying to do it to Biden.

Hagar said...

Might have. At the time it was a reference to a scene in "The Exorcist" or "Rosemary's Baby," which was being reissued for a 10-year revival and having seen it was considered very "hep" and "with it."

Michael said...

Nothing less than an auto de fe would have satisfied Hill & Co.

Lucid-Ideas said...

Joe went about this all wrong and should've taken a hint from his future self.

A phone call is insufficient. Sincerity means stroking her shoulders and smelling her hair.

It's a lesson he's learned since and now he's ready to play hardball. Real campaigning is about sincerity, it's all about pressing the flesh.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

If a leftwinger with a narrative has a lie to spin about you, it's all true.

rhhardin said...

Hill was lying, and her own witness proved it. Judge Susan Hoerchner
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/x2b9a/
minutes 20-29

She said she was talking with a despondent Hill on the telephone and trying to console her about Thomas's behavior, but she was so depressed that no amount of sympathy helped.

Sympathy always works. Except when the other person is lying.

robother said...

Joe gave her her 15 minutes of fame, but left her feeling bitter, unsatisfied. She needed an Italian stallion, like Avenatti to prolong her experience, by trotting out a series of corroborating witnesses with ever more incredible tales of black male sex.

Bruce Hayden said...

“Anita Hill was no more believable than CBF. They both lied for exactly the same reason.”

The only real differences I see there is that CBF had to up the ante in her spurious accusations to make them interesting to the Dem Senators trying to block the nomination, and she dint bite the hand that had fed her, turning, as Hill did, on her mentor who had helped her career along, very likely never having et the guy she was defaming.

rhhardin said...

What a day, what a day, for an auto da fe

- candide

hombre said...

Say, isn’t Anita an academic now? You know, reaping the rewards of subverting conservatism along with the other subversives. What does she teach, Con Law, Contracts, Torts, Admin Law? Bwahahahaha!

Caligula said...

Joe "the other white meat" Biden may well have lost the race before reaching the start line, but, using Anital Hill as an arbiter of what's Good and True surely is a very, very bad idea.

If there were justice in the world, those mandatory corporate sensitivity training sessions would be called, "Anita Hills."

Bruce Hayden said...

Ann - I am going through serious withdrawal missing your evening cafes. After having studiously ignored them for quite awhile, I let myself indulge, and became addicted.

William said...

I'd be interested in Anita Hill's take on the Fairfax accusers. Does the article mention them? They don't seem to have gathered as much attention as the Kavanaugh accuser. No book deals either. If Anita Hill really wants to demonstrate that her cause transcends partisan politics, she should take take up the cause of the Fairfax accusers.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

And so it begins. The left is going to begin ganging up on Ole Joe to push him out of the race before it begins. They can't have an old white man as a representation of the new and improved socialist radical party.

He is the past. The old days. Must be squashed. Dredge up every thing he has ever done in the last 40 years and view it through the lens of "modern" morals. He must be made to suffer!!!

He represents every triggering item that makes them all squeal like wet cats.

The craven Dems and the AOC types are going to eat him alive. Trump and the Repubs should just sit back and watch the carnage. Don't participate. Let his own people do the dirty work of eviscerating Ole Joe.

Wash their hands, like Pontious Pilate, and let his own people crucify him.

What a shame /wink

Bay Area Guy said...

I remember the Anita Hill hearings like they were yesterday. There was one unsung hero on the Senate Judiciary Committee - a Democrat Senator from Arizona, Dennis DeConcini. He basically said, Thomas is qualified, he's an honorable fellow, I'm voting Yes.

Hill followed Thomas from job to job (after the alleged harassment), suggesting that the alleged harassment wasn't really harassment at all.

Mostly, she was peeved that Thomas did not hit on her. Sometimes feelings of "rejection" get conflated with feelings of "harassment."

Justin said...

There is a big difference between "I'm sorry for what happened to you" and "I'm sorry for what I did."

Nonapod said...

For some people I suspect his strutting around nude in front of female secret service agents after his nightly swim is more forgivable than his stopping the whole Anita Hill farce.

And in 2019, is forgiveness even possible anymore?

Virgil Hilts said...

To this day I don't give a rat's ass whether Anita Hill was telling the truth. The guy was going through a divorce and depression and may have made several off-color statements during a short period of time. The guy helped and supported Anita Hill in her career and was a friend to her. Then this black man, a descendant of slaves who grew up on a small farm and gt himself to Yale law school and then nominated for the Supreme Court. Anita thinks, well he did a lot for me but I have some ammo that could potentially destroy this man and all he has achieved and all he is about to achieve and thus keep him off the court. Sounds like a reasonable thing for me to do! Sorry, but from my perspective what she did (and tried to do anonymously) was malicious and evil.

traditionalguy said...

Her 15 minutes of fame for lying to Congress never expires. The Feminists are if one thing very persistent. She has become a Star wars character in the 8th re-make.

Bay Area Guy said...

Anita Hill should come out in full support of Kamala Harris to help smash the Democratic white male patriarchy of Joe Biden... and Bernie Sanders....and Beto O'Rourke... and Pete Buttiegge.

Enough is enough!

Michael Fitzgerald said...

Racist scumbag Democrat party members.

Otto said...

Just shows that the foundation of modern feminism - Roe vs wade and anita hill accusations are a sham - whorism and mendacity. This movement will be recognized as another ( prohibition) brain fart in the history women's rights.

Big Mike said...

I never believed Anita Hill. She had ample opportunities to distance herself from him and never did. Did she not follow him from the Department of Education to the EEOC? If he was doing what she sad he did, why didn’t she part ways from him at that point?

Lucid-Ideas said...

@Caligula

"Joe "the other white meat" Biden"

+1. My god I am so using this.

Birches said...

Julie Swetnick rides again.

Francisco D said...

Clarence Thomas had no interest in the mediocre (and heavy medicated) Anita Hill. He was going places and he did not want her at his side.

She paid him back for rejecting her with obviously false testimony.

In CBF's case, it was not personal. She made up a story because she is a SJW who thought she was saving Roe v. Wade.

Ray - SoCal said...

Thomas first wife was Black.

2nd was White.

Hill is Black.

Hmm...

Ann Althouse said...

"Has Althouse ever mentioned pubic hair on this blog?"

You can search the 15-year archive of this blog by using the search box in the upper left corner.

The answer is yes, many times. It's a topic I'd probably blog any time there's an interesting article on the subject. You'll find lots of fun stuff if you do the search.

Greg Q said...

Dear Anita Hill:

I'm sorry you are an incompetent loser.

I'm sorry that you felt you had to make up a story about sexual harassment to explain to your friend why you were leaving your job.

I'm sorry that Clarence Thomas gave you a second chance, and got you hired as a civil service employee

I'm sorry you're so incompetent that you couldn't even cut it as a civil service employee

I'm sorry that your idiot friend confused your fake story of sexual harassment with your second job (the one with Thomas) not your first job.

I'm sorry you're such a moral coward that you didn't stop the train before the high tech lynching got started

I'm sorry that you're so pathetic that even as "Saint Anita hill", you still couldn't get a better job in academia

I'm very happy that your spiteful attacks on the entirely innocent Justice Thomas failed. You are worthless scum. Go away

roesch/voltaire said...

Biden blocked the other witnesses that would have collaborated Hills account of Thomas in the good old boy fashion of the time, another reason why he would get my vote.

Greg Q said...

Blogger Amadeus 48 said...

She did a bad thing to Thomas, and now she is trying to do it to Biden.


No, she's doing a good thing to Biden. He tried to lynch Thomas, after successfully lynching Bork. Biden deserves any and every bad thing that happens to him

JAORE said...

Yeah, let's "seriously investigate" the he said/she said of decades old tripe.

Michael K said...

What does she teach, Con Law, Contracts, Torts, Admin Law? Bwahahahaha!

I don't think she is any more a valid "law professor" than Obama was.

As I recall, she is more of a diversity object.

Hill accepted a position as a visiting scholar at the Institute for the Study of Social Change at University of California, Berkeley in January 1997,[45] but soon joined the faculty of Brandeis University—first at the Women's Studies Program, later moving to the Heller School for Social Policy and Management. In 2011, she also took a counsel position with the Civil Rights & Employment Practice group of the plaintiffs' law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll.[9]

Over the years, Hill has provided commentary on gender and race issues on national television programs, including 60 Minutes, Face the Nation, and Meet the Press.[4][9] She has been a speaker on the topic of commercial law as well as race and women's rights


Not teaching law student the law.

Greg Q said...

roesch/voltaire said...
Biden blocked the other witnesses that would have collaborated Hills account of Thomas in the good old boy fashion of the time, another reason why he would get my vote.

Please, tell us about these "witnesses", and exactly how they would have "collaborated" Hills' lies about Thomas.

Names. Accusations. Why the accusations should be believed. Enlighten us! Don't hide your light under a bushel basket!

Michael K said...

R/V forgets (haha) that Biden also blocked the black witnesses who were at the hearing to defend Thomas.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Senate and public did not believe Anita Hill, because she was lying.

Goldenpause said...

Anita Hill apparently can't let go of the fact that her 15 minutes fame ended decades ago. She is like the star of a sitcom which was cancelled many years ago who gets called by the media every time there is news about anyone else who was in the cast. She clearly is a very bitter person who doesn't understand that harboring resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die. Biden made a mistake in reaching out to her.

Fernandistein said...

She cannot support Mr. Biden for president until he takes full responsibility for his conduct,

Aww, that's so sweet. Confess!

deeply insensitive

Great Value Insensitivity, now 25% Deeper.

FIDO said...

I'm sorry...when did these women want to come out? She wants a mulligan to blacken Thomas' name even more at this late date. A 'Post Kavanaugh'.

Men who are predators like that find it very hard to change. So why haven't we heard more?

Maybe someone could apply her 'Crewl Nutrality™' to the statements of Anita Hill and parse her credibility.

JAORE said...

It is a tragic reality that many on the left STILL reference Justice Thomas as a sexist pig based on Ms. Hill's unproven allegations. It will still appear in his obituary.

Same with Kavanaugh.

The leftists are nasty pieces of work.

Mike Sylwester said...

David Brock's book The Real Anita Hill: The Untold Story is a journalistic masterpiece. It’s one of the best books I ever read. The story's essence is as follows.

Anita Hill was an incompetent lawyer. Her understanding of the law was mediocre, and she could not write well. Her main qualification was that she was an African-American woman. She would work at one place until her incompetence became too obvious, and then she would go to work at some other place.

During 1982, she was working in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). For a while she worked under the supervision of a lawyer named Chris Roggerson, who was the Executive Assistant of Clarence Thomas, who was the EEOC’s Chairman. Roggerson was a notorious sexual harasser, and he harassed Hill. During that time, Hill confided to a lawyer friend, Susan Hoerchner, about Roggerson’s harassment.

Hill and Hoerchner drifted apart in about 1984.

In 1991, when Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court, Hoerchner telephoned Hill out of the blue and asked whether Thomas was the supervisor who had sexually harassed her. Hill responded ambiguously, and Hoerchner took that response as a confirmation. In the following days, Hoerchner secretly passed this false accusation to various people who were trying to stop the nomination of Thomas.

As the situation developed, Hill decided to go along with the false accusation — but on the condition that she herself remain anonymous. The idea was that when the anonymous accusation eventually reached Thomas, then he himself would be compelled to withdraw from his nomination rather than endure public embarrassment.

As it turned out, though, Thomas stubbornly refused to withdraw from his nomination, and then the secret false accuser’s name — Anita Hill — was leaked to the press. From that point on, Hill felt compelled to press forward with her false story.

Hill is a despicable person, a character assassin. She ended up teaching law at the University of Oklahoma. As throughout her career, she is incompetent in this professional position too.

Bay Area Guy said...

Who put the pubic hair in RV's Coke?

gilbar said...

when the anonymous accusation eventually reached Thomas, then he himself would be compelled to withdraw from his nomination rather than endure public embarrassment.

And Trump learned from that; unlike EVERY OTHER republican! What will the future bring?

Rob said...

Just now on “The View,” Biden was referring to “Dr. Hill.” Apparently a J.D. entitles you to the honorific, just as a Doctor of Education degree obliges us always to refer to Dr. Jill Biden.

rcocean said...

Once again, the Left/Liberals just keep on lying year after year, so eventually their Lie becomes the Truth.

Biden precided over a "High Tech Lynching" of Thomas. He humiliated him and tried to destroy him. Yes, no doubt some other women tried to come forward (after all 2,000 women called the FBI to say Kavanaugh assaulted them) but none of them were credible.

OTOH, almost every woman who worked with Thomas, supported him and they testified, at 10 PM at Night - in a group. That's because Joe Biden wanted to bury their testimony.

rcocean said...

With every dumb "White Knight", Dishonest Leftist, and Feminist against them - its amazing Kavanaugh or Thomas got confirmed. And in 1991, I thought the Senate Judiciary Committee was of low caliber, but they look like intellectual Giants compared the 2018 Senate Clown Show with Booker, Harris, Flake, and Sasse.

Greg Q said...

Rob said...
Just now on “The View,” Biden was referring to “Dr. Hill.”

That's fair.

The first "Dr. Hill" was "Dr Harold Hill, professor of musicology", an utter con man.

This latest "Dr. hill", is just as much of a lying con artist, just lacking in all the positive qualities that "The Music Man" such a delightful musical

iowan2 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mccullough said...

Hill is a spinster and Thomas has been married to the same woman for a long time.

Biden is a fool.

Amadeus 48 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mccullough said...

Hill can bring forth all the people who corroborate her allegations any time she wants.

Let’s hear from all of them.

Then the House can impeach Thomas like they can impeach Kavanaugh.

Let the Woke Inquisition begin

tim maguire said...

Mr. D said...
He was alleged to have said. Don't believe there was any corroboration.


True, but it doesn't matter whether she was telling the truth or not. In fact, I think it's perfectly possible they were both telling the truth--he did say those things, but they were such a pile of nothing that he had no memory of saying them.

iowan2 said...

People refuse to learn from President Trump. Apologies are admission of guilt.

Some legal eagle here could maybe explain to me exactly what a Senate Committee is supposed to do with an uncorroborated accusation. Congressional committees have subpoena power, and can investigate things that come under their Constitutional power. Investigating Sexual harassment involving private citizens is not something that comes under the power of Congress.

The entire nation needs a semester long class in Federalism, and enumerated powers of the Federal govt.
Like convicts,voting, in or out of prison. Not a federal power to decide. Why are the media asking a question of Presidential candidates, that they have no power to influence?

Pianoman said...

Ask 100 voters under age 30 if they know who Anita Hill is.

I bet you'd get less than 10 people who could tell you.

Yancey Ward said...

"Biden blocked the other witnesses that would have collaborated Hills account of Thomas"

Now that mistake is hilariously accurate!

mockturtle said...

I watched all of the Clarence Thomas Senate committee hearings and felt, more than anything else, a profound disgust for members of the Senate. Except for the remarkable former senator from Wyoming, Alan Simpson, who displayed both wit and sanity, they thoroughly beclowned themselves. Hill was not credible but it was really a dog and pony show for the committee. The pony shat on the dog and then the dog gobbled it up.

bagoh20 said...

WoW! I had forgotten that we have had a very unserious process for decades. Joe Biden brought it all back. Thanks, Joe. Maybe things aren't getting worse. They were already worse. You'll notice that it's always the same party that seems to go to the silly zone with serious stuff.

CJinPA said...

In recent interviews, Ms. Hill and others involved in the confirmation fight portrayed Mr. Biden’s handling of the hearing as at best inept and at worst deeply insensitive.

You know your society has become hyper-feminized when being "insensitive" is considered worse than being "inept" for a government official.

Mike Sylwester said...

Joe Biden's recent phone call to Anita Hill seems to be a desperate act. He must fear that he will not win the female or Black vote -- especially the female Black vote -- in the Democrat primaries.

Biden should not have phoned Hill.

When Biden is asked about that matter, he should say, truthfully, that she got a fair hearing and that her story did not convince enough Senators, including himself, to vote against Thomas.

In other words, Biden should boldly tell the truth, rather than blatantly and pathetically humiliate himself pandering for votes.

mockturtle said...

DBQ observes: And so it begins. The left is going to begin ganging up on Ole Joe to push him out of the race before it begins. They can't have an old white man as a representation of the new and improved socialist radical party.

And the media are handing out tickets to the BBQ.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"[S]he cannot support Mr. Biden for president until he takes full responsibility for his conduct"

What does that look like? I can't count the number of Democrats I've seen take "full responsibility" for their misdeeds and then suffer no consequences whatsoever. It's all dumbshow over there.

Yancey Ward said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yancey Ward said...

Mike Sylwester wrote:

"In other words, Biden should boldly tell the truth, rather than blatantly and pathetically humiliate himself pandering for votes."

It is his Sister Souljah moment, and he is sure to fail at it.

rcocean said...

If "Slow Joe" gets bounced because he's a white man well I couldn't be happier. Biden is on record saying "White men need to give up power". Of course, Joe meant OTHER white men.

Besides, Old Liberal/Leftists like Biden always get burned. They don't keep up with the latest party line and recant their old "Bad think" fast enough. So, they get tossed into the ashheap of history with all the old "counter-revolutionaries." If Joe Biden had been in the USSR, he'd be Screaming "But I love Comrade Stalin" as he was hauled off to the Gulag.

rcocean said...

"Hill was not credible but it was really a dog and pony show for the committee."

The only good part was Thomas' righteously denouncing the whole crap show as a "High tech lynching" - truer words were never spoken.

Automatic_Wing said...

All very amusing, considering that Biden is a serial sexual harrasser whose offenses have been captured on camera numerous times while Thomas was basically accused of telling some dirty jokes.

Kevin said...

So...

No candidacy, no apology?

And he is shocked she finds him insincere.

Clyde said...

Why would Anita Hill support Joe Biden for president? I mean, if he ends up being the nominee, she'd probably vote for him because of the D after his name, but in the primaries? Whoa, Nelly, he's not from her stripe of the identity rainbow, and we all know that for Dems, it's Identity Uber Alles. Barring a sex change operation and/or melanin transplants, Sleepy Creepy Joe ain't gettin' no black woman to support him. Just sayin'.

Jim at said...

Anita Hill was no more believable than CBF. They both lied for exactly the same reason.

Bears repeating.

Clyde said...

Well, other than that black woman mercenary he just hired who was on record that it was time for Democrats to move on past white men. Well, unless there was a lot of money in it for her, of course, then it's Hakuna Matata!

Jeff Brokaw said...

When I think of a list of people who are owed an apology, Anita Hill is not on it.

But the man she falsely accused certainly is.

Krumhorn said...

I watched all of the Clarence Thomas Senate committee hearings and felt, more than anything else, a profound disgust for members of the Senate.

I agree! A key moment I recall was a snarling Biden threatening to cut off the microphone of Senator Arlen Specter. It was a vicious moment and sealed my impression of Biden as a political hack.

- Krumhorn

HoodlumDoodlum said...

If living well is the best revenge I'd say Justice Thomas is doing just fine!
He's a very entertaining speaker--if you have an opportunity to see a speech of his you shouldn't miss it (I drove to a law school graduation to hear one--both funny and moving/heartfelt). I haven't read any recent accounts of people bumping into him and his wife as they cruise around in an RV on vacation but I hope he's still enjoying himself.

Biden? Everyone knows who Biden is.

Unknown said...

Nice, the democrats have dredged up another race-baiter.

Danno said...

What mockturtle said at 11:44 and rcocean said at 12:30.

I have never been so disgusted in a Senate confirmation (at least since Bork, and then until Kavanaugh) after seeing Judge Thomas put through the high-tech lynching in his confirmation hearing.

Michael said...


Anita Hill, as I live and breathe! Kewl!!
And still making nonsensical demands and denunciations. U go 'nita!

LT said...

No Joe No Joe

Tina Trent said...

I had a law professor who was very inappropriate. He made us write about sex acts in exchange for fur coats in his contracts final. He also made us repeat back sex details from (imaginary) contracts between prostitutes and their Johns in front of the entire class as we recounted cases. Once he made me stand up and repeat back to him terms of a contract between two businessmen who were dictating letters to each other through their secretaries as the secretaries sat on their respective laps. When I failed to say that part, he stopped me and made me repeat those details to him, in front of dozens of silent students.

I sat next to an older black woman in class, and she cried over the humiliation of sexual behavior. But grades mattered, and he was a big civil rights activist in Atlanta, and the school and the ACLU loved him.

Georgia State Law was run by a feminist activist woman and crawling with feminist law professors who knew perfectly well what was happening in this guy's classroom. And they did nothing because his politics were the correct ones. This was right around the time of the Anita Hill hearings.

What was going on at Georgia State School of Law was what real sexual harassment looks like. This professor once sat very close next to me outside the building and told me that he was "intrigued" by me. I stood up and made it very clear to onlookers that I was walking away. I then conversed with other students appalled by him and as a group we decided to report him. That's what you do when you're sexually harassed, not wait until it is politically expedient to say something. Also, I wasn't "traumatized," just royally pissed off.

Of course none of the feminist law professors did anything to stop that behavior. Neither did the non-feminist ones. Some pigs are more equal than other pigs. Lesson learned.

I don't believe Anita Hill.

Bay Area Guy said...

Great story, @Tina Trent. You handled it well.

FullMoon said...

code:

Radical Leftist David Brock wrote a book proving Anita Hill is a low down dirty liar

Leland said...

These are all minor attacks on Joe. 6 months from now; they'll be doing wall to wall stories of how great Biden is, and how many slaying attacks he took early in the campaign and survived.

mockturtle said...

Leland, I suspect you are wrong. Biden is not the media's anointed one.

truth speaker said...

Clyde said...
Why would Anita Hill support Joe Biden for president? I mean, if he ends up being the nominee, she'd probably vote for him because of the D after his name, but in the primaries? Whoa, Nelly, he's not from her stripe of the identity rainbow, and we all know that for Dems, it's Identity Uber Alles. Barring a sex change operation and/or melanin transplants, Sleepy Creepy Joe ain't gettin' no black woman to support him. Just sayin'.

Sooooo... she still wants the ‘D’ no matter who it’s attached to...

glacial erratic said...

Good Lord! She didn't lose a limb, and she was feted far beyond her worth by the liberal establishment. Give it a rest, already.

Gk1 said...

Why do democrats think that watching an old white guy having to kiss some black has-been's ass is going to convince Ohio, North Carolina, Florida and most of the fly over states to abandon Trump? I would think it would remind most normal people of what a shit-show the Kavanaugh hearings were and why you can't allow democrats back into power.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Awww, the lying retarded whore doesn't support the lying retarded candidate. Fuck these people.

Brn said...

It might be interesting to note that the Republican members of the committee wanted Angela Wright to testify because they thought that she would help Thomas. She was fired by him for using a gay slur and told people that she would get revenge against him (https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/jill-abramson-smears-justice-thomas-again-part-2-anita-hill/).

Big Mike said...

Anita Hill should realize that between her testimony and the testimony of Christine Blasey-Ford, given by both women under oath, no one believes decades old charges of sexual harassment anymore. So there has been change. Though in neither case has there been accountability.

Chris N said...

It’s probably by far the most fame, notoriety and attentions she’s ever received, so why give up now?

The Grievance Mill runs 24/7

Ceciliahere said...

I find it ironic and hilarious that sitting on the judiciary committee dias next to ‘sleepy joe” is Ted Kennedy aka “the swimmer”. Too bad MaryJo couldn’t testify regarding sexual harassment. The hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Anonymous said...

@rhhardin said...
"Hill was lying, and her own witness proved it. Judge Susan Hoerchner
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/x2b9a/
minutes 20-29
She said she was talking with a despondent Hill on the telephone and trying to console her about Thomas's behavior, but she was so depressed that no amount of sympathy helped.
Sympathy always works. Except when the other person is lying"

Holy Moly. Good thing @rhhardin you posted the link. Thank you so, so much. I just listened to the entire 104 minutes. If any of you here had an ounce of integrity you'd first, listen to the video. Second, if you actually had listened you'd learn how egregiously wrong, repugnant, and nauseatingly, pathetic anyone is who didn't believe Anita Hill and every single witness who spoke so honestly, and with great dignity, in her defense.

Arlen Spector: Let me move on then, Judge Hoerchner. You talked, on page 30 of your deposition, about your view of Judge Thomas. And it starts on page 30, line 5, I will skip up to line 2, where it said:Question: And you based, you said an attitude toward power. Where did that come from? Why would you think that Judge Thomas had an attitude about power, where did that come from?

Judge Susan Hoerchner: It came from the idea that most of the positions that he had, that I knew about were in civil rights, equal employment opportunity and that his behavior really showed a disregard for general principles of equal opportunity or the rights of individuals and it led me to believe that he possibly thought that the law was for other people.

Arlen Spector: Judge Susan Hoerchner, did you ever consider in the light of Professor Hill telling you that Judge Thomas had sexually harassed her and he was the Chairman of the EEOC, which was theNation's chief law enforcement officer on this issue, did you ever consider giving Professor Hill advice that she ought to come forward and expose him so that he would not be in the position to thwart appropriate enforcement of equal rights, and laws against sexual harassment?

Susan Hoerchner: No, Senator, I did not. I believe that the tremendous inequity in power between them would have been dispositive.