[ul]
[li]She wore white at her high school graduation because she was professing to be a virgin[/li][li]Even though Kavanaugh had attempted to rape her[/li][li]And she should have expected Kavanaugh to attempt to rape her[/li][li]Because that’s the kind of thing that drunk privileged kids are known to do[/li][li]And she wore short skirts and was pretty, so she was asking for it[/li][li]So why was she so surprised?[/li][li]But he didn’t do it![/li][li]Also he probably hasn’t raped anyone in 35 years[/li][li]So let’s nominate him to the Supreme Court[/li][/ul]
Yeah, I might be able to think of an alternative explanation. In fact, it would be hard not to.
And by the way, here’s the winning move when your supreme court nominee gets accused of sexual assault:
Step 1: Immediately withdraw the nomination. In the case of Kavanaugh, grouse about democrats gumming up the process by not bringing forward this evidence immediately (accurately).
Step 2: Immediately bring forward a nominee who is very unlikely to be credibly accused of sexual assault. If you’re really concerned that the accusations are bogus (because, you know, the lesson from #MeToo was not “people in positions of power are often free to commit sexual assault because nobody believes they will face justice if accused, and making such accusations against someone in a position of power is extremely risky” but rather “lots of women are lining up to reap the benefits of falsely accusing powerful men of rape”), just nominate a woman.
Step 3: proceed to move that nominee to the supreme court, showing moral integrity, shutting down the complaints of the opposition with regards to sexual assault, and showing that you have a pool of potential supreme court nominees deeper than “one guy who was accused of sexual assault”.
The republicans didn’t do this, and it’s too late now for this to be in any way an effective strategy. But how the fuck do you hear “your nominee is accused of sexual assault” in the middle of the #MeToo movement, and not immediately realize, “Shit, this is a really fucking stupid hill to die on.”
His strategy is that he did not do it. He vehemently denies it. The only eye-witness does not remember the assault nor the party. They’ll dig up others who will give statement they don’t remember anything. Ford admits to not remembering details. It’s a pretty solid defense. (Plus we’re not calling the therapist to clear up her discrepancy, the eye-witness to probe his memory, etc.). Barring something seriously dramatic, it’s already over.
You’re idea of showing non-party, ie, non-drinking, events is a good one. I’d guess, the calendar is a type of filibuster tool. It can’t prove the merits, but there’s only so much time. If you want to talk about the calendar, you’ll waste time as a Democrat and fill time with non-drinking activities that summer as a Republican.
My initial thought after reading the article though was to laugh - I didn’t do it because it’s not on my calendar…
Seriously the issue is who your audience is. The Trump voters who have stuck with him, including the Evangelical voters and especially the non-college educated white men voters, they want the wagons circled, they believe him not her. And for now risking their ire is not worth losing others, like Independents and suburban voters, more.
You still wonder? After all that time people spent politely explaining it to you? I think they should be insulted that you wasted their time like that.
The PredictIt chances for Kavanaugh to fail to get confirmed by the end of October skyrocketed today, from about 36% to 58% as of this writing. I expect part of that is that Ford confirmed that she will attend the hearing next week, but another part may be Twitter rumors (and Drudge, of all sources) that another accuser is on the verge of coming forward (no details). But just rumors for now, as far as I can figure.
None of Ford’s friends back up her statement. Her own Senator (a woman) did not think it important or believable enough to bring it up during the hearings.
No, I don’t wonder why someone without a any evidence would want to purger themselves and get sued for defamation of character. I would expect a fear of lawyers, airplanes and anything else that can tossed up to delay the process.
If the party had roughly 5 people in attendance, it sounds more like a spontaneous “hey, my parents are away so wanna hang out at the crib and get drunk?” kind of thing and less like a pre-planned affair that would show up in anyone’s calendar.
I find it weird that Kav is putting out stuff like this to defend himsellf. If he’s going to do that, why not just ask for an investigation? Are we really supposed to think he would volunteer any evidence that would hurt him? No of course not. An impartial investigation potentially could do that.
LOL. Please inform the law enforcement establishment of the US that they should no longer investigate complaints and statements from citizens about crimes they suffered or witnesses… that it’s entirely the responsibility of those citizens to provide their own evidence beyond their statements of what they witnessed/experienced.
Who else would be able to provide any evidence? Especially since she has mentioned four people, all of whom deny this ever happened.
How does it work in your world? If I go to the police and say I got mugged and they ask me where this happened, should I say that it is not my job to provide evidence, but theirs to find it?
Aren’t you a lawyer? This seems like a strange opinion for anyone with any amount of legitimate legal training to hold.
Simple logical question for you: Suppose someone is unable to provide evidence because they have been, say, murdered. Do the police throw up their hands and say “welp, it was his job to provide evidence…nothing we can do now.”
Does that seem logical to you? Apply that legal training of yours.
Did you read the article? Kavanaugh’s team conceded that the calendar was not exculpatory. However, for a 17 year old kid to keep such a detailed calendar of events during the summer, and indeed to include parties on the calendar, is one good piece of evidence for him.
No, but if you said “My head still hurts, but I think it might have been at one of these five intersections, and I remember the face of who did it, and his name is Trent Gavenaw, and his friend Bart Juror was there too, and these three others were nearby when it happened”, then the cops would be pretty likely to go check out those intersections, interview Trent Gavenaw and Bart Juror and the possible witnesses, and, you know, gather evidence.
I can think of a multitude of ways that evidence could be gathered, and I’m not even a professional investigator. I just turn on my brain.
For example they could go talk to Kavanaugh’s classmates and friends, see if he ever talked about the assault.
That literally took me less than a second to think of, and I’m not a super genius. If I thought for 5 more seconds I could think of 5 more ways they could gather evidence.
