posted by gut

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume she's a feminazi...I think her story is probably true, and being Kavanaugh is going to destroy women's rights and take away their abortions she HAD to come forward.

Now there IS a chance the story was about someone else and she's manipulated the facts to torpedo his nomination [because...feminazi].  It's just pretty unlikely, especially given she passed a lie detector (which studies show is probably about 85% reliable).

The bigger question is if things really happened as she believes/recalls....because I'm guessing this is a drunk 15 and 17 year old at a party.  Except Kavanaugh denies even being at the party.  If reality is something less than her version of events, should that disqualify him?  The problem is, she talks about him covering her mouth to stop her yelling....which is pretty black-and-white that this is much more serious than a clumsy come-on.

I suppose it would have to depend on where in between their stories the truth ... or at least the most plausible description of it ... lies.  If it appears more likely that he was not there, it'd be hard to disqualify him based on this account.  If her account is not factual to the letter (as you said, this is a drunk teen's recollection), but it's still close enough, I have no problem with ousting a nominee based on something less than her account if it still involves sexual assault, even if not necessarily as described.

As an aside, I've enjoyed reading all the angsty people who are "afraid" of being accused of sexual assault because they don't know where the line is anymore.

posted by SportsAndLady

Not surprised at all to see some of the people on here calling the woman a liar. Lol. If this was a liberal candidate, you’d all be saying she’s telling the truth and he shouldn’t be a SCOTUS.  Admit it..

Just speaking for myself I don't care if he is confirmed for the SC or not. I was the same with Gorsuch. I didn't care about Kagan either and she's liberal. Sometimes it's just not about political affiliation.

As an aside, this reminds me very much of the Clarence Thomas thing.

What is the end game here? If Kavanaugh drops out or it gets delayed to after the election, do they really think they can delay a nominee for 2 years?

The only thing I know for sure if this situation was reversed is that left would be hysterical that a Senator held on to information for that long and didn’t go through the proper channels. Feinstein should be punished for deliberately holding onto this until now instead of using the confidential confirmation process, which is the whole point of it. These confirmation hearings will undoubtedly get more retarded now going forward.

posted by iclfan2

What is the end game here? If Kavanaugh drops out or it gets delayed to after the election, do they really think they can delay a nominee for 2 years?

The only thing I know for sure if this situation was reversed is that left would be hysterical that a Senator held on to information for that long and didn’t go through the proper channels. Feinstein should be punished for deliberately holding onto this until now instead of using the confidential confirmation process, which is the whole point of it. These confirmation hearings will undoubtedly get more retarded now going forward.

As far as your last sentence goes, I would have thought they'd hit bottom by now. I underestimate the power of stupid people in groups.

In the meantime, we're supposed to be swayed by one person vs 40+ people, including another guy who was there that alleged night JUST because of party affiliation. Ya'll can do that if you want to, I'd just prefer that due process happens and that this is investigated further. I don't care if it happens long after midterms. I just don't. Because at the end of the process the truth will come out whether it is in favor of Kavanaugh or not and then proceedings can go from there. That may mean somebody else entirely has to be put up. Who cares? I would rather that happen than accusations being thrown out there and decided by social media. I would hope that everybody who is in this forum would feel the same.

What angers me about all of these situations is that the accused is guilty as soon as the accusation is made....regardless of any proof.

I agree....hold the vote until both testify.  However, there needs to be some solid proof that what is being alleged actually happened.  Not her therapist's session notes of her recollection of an event that happened 30 years ago.  Without real proof, this is a 'she said - he said' and nothing more.

posted by iclfan2

She herself doesn't know the place or date of the party....  And there will never be proof, it happened 30+ years ago. Someone else saying there was a party doesn't prove anything. Y'all need to be more skeptical.

I'm skeptical of lots of things. Such as how the Rs could come up with a list of 65 women vouching for the dude's character within one day of the allegations coming public unless they knew he had skeletons in his closet and wanted to have damage control accomplished in advance so they could immediately combat said allegations.

Let Congress grill the two of them on it.  If she's credible, then Trump should pull his nomination and have a new nomination that same day.  Accelerate the process because Feinstein sat on the info in order to delay it.

If additional evidence comes out, Kavanaugh could be impeached and removed for lying.  Isn't that correct?

posted by CenterBHSFan

So the woman didn't want to deal with the scrutiny of a court room. I can understand that, for sure. But now... now she's got that scrutiny x10. 

Ok. I can see how she would pass by a smaller scrutiny for a bigger one. Different times of life and all of that. 

Still skeptical. I can't help it. The timing is just too convenient.

Indeed; it is all that was needed to keep the release of declassified documents revealing the massive corruption and conspiracy at the FBI and DoJ to thwart an election off the front pages (as if the liberal media would even consider exposing such historic criminality).

posted by CenterBHSFan

As an aside, this reminds me very much of the Clarence Thomas thing.

Except that was more clumsy flirting, back when that sort of thing was common and not yet considered sexual harassment in the workplace.  Doesn't make it right, but I'm not sure that should disqualify him.

And it was also 27 years ago.  Safe bet if we're considering Clarence Thomas today and Anita Hill makes that accusation - even if it's from 30 years ago - he's sunk.

posted by gut

Let Congress grill the two of them on it.  If she's credible, then Trump should pull his nomination and have a new nomination that same day.  Accelerate the process because Feinstein sat on the info in order to delay it.

If additional evidence comes out, Kavanaugh could be impeached and removed for lying.  Isn't that correct?

And if she doesn't show up on Monday? Feinstein is already trying to delay it further. Ford's lawyer did not reply yesterday. How long do we play this game? If she doesn't show up monday, call for the vote.

posted by gut

Let Congress grill the two of them on it.  If she's credible, then Trump should pull his nomination and have a new nomination that same day.  Accelerate the process because Feinstein sat on the info in order to delay it.

If additional evidence comes out, Kavanaugh could be impeached and removed for lying.  Isn't that correct?

Fine, but there's no valid non-political reason that couldn't happen in a week or less. If there's a sincere element to this and not just the obvious delaying tactic, it shoudn;'t be a problem. If the Dems balk, call for the vote.

posted by queencitybuckeye

Fine, but there's no valid non-political reason that couldn't happen in a week or less. If there's a sincere element to this and not just the obvious delaying tactic, it shoudn;'t be a problem. If the Dems balk, call for the vote.

I completely agree.  And why the need for deep strategizing with a lawyer?  All she has to do is get up there and basically confirm what is in the therapists notes.  She really doesn't need to worry about slander/defamation.  You took a lie detector test, but you're unwilling to be questioned by former prosecutors?

Unless the hang-up is whether or not to make the hearing public.  Maybe the transcripts, but I can't believe people are actually debating whether her grilling should be televised.

We all know how this is going to go.  Both will testify on Monday, there will be a lot of he said/she said bullshit to rile up both sides, the dems will say they must delay the vote, the GOP will say fuck off, and then Kavanaugh will be confirmed. 

posted by like_that

We all know how this is going to go.  Both will testify on Monday, there will be a lot of he said/she said bullshit to rile up both sides, the dems will say they must delay the vote, the GOP will say fuck off, and then Kavanaugh will be confirmed. 

She is delaying.....the left is lilely looking for a credible witness that knew about it 40 years ago and she doent have one.  The defense does.....the guy that supposedly was there....and he said it didnt happen.

posted by Spock

She is delaying.....the left is lilely looking for a credible witness that knew about it 40 years ago and she doent have one.  The defense does.....the guy that supposedly was there....and he said it didnt happen.

She named the only witness that exists, and he disputes it happened.  She's already said she doesn't remember when, where or who was there at the party.  She's said she told no one about the incident, and never talked about it with anyone until 25 years later in therapy.  It's far from inconceivable she's misremembered a drunken incident, or even had the wrong guy all along (they went to different schools, 2 years apart....no idea how well they knew each other).

Dems are insisting the FBI investigate because they know that would delay a vote until after the election.  Nevermind the FBI said this is a local police matter, but I don't see how an investigation is going to turn up anything new in a he said/she said.  The two guys may have been too drunk to remember the incident, as well.

posted by gut

She named the only witness that exists, and he disputes it happened.  She's already said she doesn't remember when, where or who was there at the party.  She's said she told no one about the incident, and never talked about it with anyone until 25 years later in therapy.  It's far from inconceivable she's misremembered a drunken incident, or even had the wrong guy all along (they went to different schools, 2 years apart....no idea how well they knew each other).

Dems are insisting the FBI investigate because they know that would delay a vote until after the election.  Nevermind the FBI said this is a local police matter, but I don't see how an investigation is going to turn up anything new in a he said/she said.  The two guys may have been too drunk to remember the incident, as well.

 

This.  It is not a federal crime and the FBI does not need or will be involved at any point.  Its a pipe dream that the left will never get

posted by gut

Let Congress grill the two of them on it.  If she's credible, then Trump should pull his nomination and have a new nomination that same day.  Accelerate the process because Feinstein sat on the info in order to delay it.

If additional evidence comes out, Kavanaugh could be impeached and removed for lying.  Isn't that correct?

Frankly, this is probably how this should go anyway.  Confirm the guy, and if more comes out, remove his ass.

Both sides are really acting like hypocrites in this whole thing.

If this guy were a lefty, Republicans would be pulling out the virtue signaling in full force, waiving the moral high ground flag.  But he's not.  So they're not.

On the other side, if the Democrats truly believed this was a legitimate concern, and not just a ploy to delay the confirmation, then they would have no (moral) problem with him getting confirmed and letting the investigation work itself out.  But they don't.  So they do.

posted by gut

The two guys may have been too drunk to remember the incident, as well.

 

The parties in my teen years I recall the girls being just as drunk as the boys.  She was likely drunk herself.

posted by majorspark

The parties in my teen years I recall the girls being just as drunk as the boys.  She was likely drunk herself.

I'm sure.  Really just saying it's possible [likely] none of them really knows what happened but 100% believes their version of events.

I have my doubts she will even testify.  I'm not sure she's made any formal, declarative statements.  So far, it appears the story is all hearsay - secondhand accounts of things she has allegedly told her therapist, lawyer, Feinstein, etc..

And, apparently, the only witness [according to her] has declined to testify and has said he doesn't remember the incident.  That really should be the end of it, after a follow-up appearance from Kavanaugh, because all she has is therapy notes that fails to mention anyone by name.  That's unfortunate, but that really does make all the difference - if Kavanaugh was in the therapist notes [2012, mind you], I'd be completely satisfied.

CNN is now reporting this lady is not showing up Monday.

All of this is purely a delay tactic.  Feistein is to blame for this.  

Senate needs to just push this through

posted by gut

And, apparently, the only witness [according to her] has declined to testify and has said he doesn't remember the incident.  That really should be the end of it, after a follow-up appearance from Kavanaugh, because all she has is therapy notes that fails to mention anyone by name.  That's unfortunate, but that really does make all the difference - if Kavanaugh was in the therapist notes [2012, mind you], I'd be completely satisfied.

Agree.  This makes all the difference to me as well.

posted by Spock

CNN is now reporting this lady is not showing up Monday.

All of this is purely a delay tactic.  Feistein is to blame for this.  

Senate needs to just push this through

I agree.  Already gave the reasoning - only witness she identified disputes it.  I don't think you need to talk to her if you are satisfied Kavanaugh is being truthful.

To be fair, she brought this up soon after he was nominated.  Which is another reason to believe this isn't some elaborate fabrication.  But if you're not willing to testify, then maybe the story is not what has been reported and/or you don't fully trust your own recollection.  Door #3 is she was a real party girl, and doesn't want her family to know that.  Not passing judgement on that, but it would explain why her attorney is supposedly trying to set boundaries.

Now her lawyer is demanding an FBI investigation. Kavanaugh has gotten vetted by the fbi 6 different times throughout his career. (FBI already said they won’t investigate). Also doesn’t want a public hearing, which I think is a resonable request, but if she doesn’t show up on Monday to a private one, hold the vote. 

posted by iclfan2

Now her lawyer is demanding an FBI investigation. Kavanaugh has gotten vetted by the fbi 6 different times throughout his career. (FBI already said they won’t investigate). Also doesn’t want a public hearing, which I think is a resonable request, but if she doesn’t show up on Monday to a private one, hold the vote. 

This.