Just thought of something else an investigation could uncover.
If Ford carpooled with others to the party in question, how did she get home that night? I don’t know if she has disclosed this. If she carpooled home with the same crew she came with, might one of them have noticed her being upset? A little shaken, a little teary? A little freaked the fuck out?
There were only a few people at this alleged party. So few that if one of them suddenly got so upset that they needed to hole up in the bathroom for a while to calm down, this could be enough to mess up the group-level festivities in a very memorable way. Might one of the attendees remember this happening?
Ford probably knows whether someone can attest to certain things supportive of her claim; this would be a witness that an investigator could interview. As it stands, without an investigation, it’s going to be a challenge to get any witness perspectives aired without dragging someone into a shitshow.
She’s on record as saying she doesn’t remember how she got home. It’s unclear if there was 1 or 2 other people at the party besides For, Kavanaugh and Judge. It would be very good to hear from that person or those people, and I would expect one of the Democratic Senators to at least ask if she knows who they were, even if they don’t name names.
You’re completely missing the point. An accusation of the kind made by Ford has no basis on which to launch a police investigation. Otherwise every member of Congress would be accused of a crime in order to generate an investigation and interfere with the election process.
We have a vetting process and it’s not complicated. If have an issue you wish to bring up then do it. what has occurred is a 36 year old, unsubstantiated claim followed by a demand for an investigation as well a list of requirements in order to testify before the committee. It’s an obvious stall tactic designed to move the process past the next election cycle.
You’re very demonstrably wrong about this. The President can (and past Presidents have) very easily ask the FBI to aid him in evaluating his nominee for the SCOTUS. It’s happened before (very frequently, in fact, including with Clarence Thomas), and ought to happen in this case.
It’s a reasonable logical surmise. Generally, those for whom the truth being revealed would be more helpful are more interested in expending effort to find the truth.
It would not be a police investigation, with the intent to build a case for prosecution. It would more akin to a background investigation to find and document evidence about a certain allegation.
Why do you suppose every member Congress isn’t besigned with accusations like this, if this prospect was worth worrying about?
First of all, besides a brief denial, Kavanaugh has been (wisely) silent on the whole thing. You don’t know what he wants or doesn’t want. But secondly, he may not want the details of his high school years laid out in front of the country and his young daughters whether or not that incident happened.
But frankly, you’re using the old canard that if you nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Magiver: Please drop this whole bit about the police. We are not talking about criminal investigation by the police.
It’s not proof that he’s guilty, or anything like that, but it’s reasonable to suspect that the fact that Ford seems so willing to have further investigation, and Kavanaugh does not, might be related to their knowledge of the truth about this incident. Not decisively, but another piece of data that can reasonably go into our bystander evaluations of who is more likely to be lying here.
Hell no. We’re talking about the weight of an accusation. This has none. If there isn’t enough substance for a police investigation then it carriers the weight of the stamp it was mailed with. Otherwise Feinstein would have made that the first flag to run up the pole. She held it for a reason and the reason is it has no basis of fact.
Ms. Keyer, whom CNN confirms is “a lifelong friend of Ford’s,” is the third named witness to deny any knowledge of the allegations. The other two, Mark Judge and Patrick Smyth, issued written statements to that effect earlier in the week. Thus far, nobody has backed up the account advanced by Kavanaugh’s accuser, while Kavanaugh and three other named witnesses have rejected it outright.
So is that everyone alleged to be at the party with Ford? None of them have supported her allegations, or even remember being at a party like she describes, correct?
Person not directly involved with event who was never told about the event has no recollection of the event that they weren’t involved with nor were told about.
This is supposed to be news?
The characterizations made by the National Review article, that the witness “has rejected the allegations made by Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser” and " nobody has backed up the account advanced by Kavanaugh’s accuser, while Kavanaugh and three other named witnesses have rejected it outright" do not line up with the facts. That article you cited is being outright dishonest.
If I’m understanding the articles correctly, Ford said Keyser was at the party and Keyser says she doesn’t remember ever being at a party with Kavanaugh. Does that clear up for you why it is news?