Nah, at this point I want an investigation. One by the FBI into the claims. Another by, uh, somebody more competent, into how they could have missed these all of these allegations, particularly multiple instances of GANG RAPE over six background checks, which resulted in a man getting on the DC court of appeals. If he did it, I want him to burn, and I want whoever missed it to burn. If he didn’t do it, I want Avenatti to be sued into the poorhouse for slander.
My skepticism of the charges hinged primarily on my inability to conceive of this level of incompetency on the FBI’s part.
We know that he has not done so publicly at least, and if wanted it to happen a public call for such would be the way to go.
Really, the positions being expressed by his defenders are appealing to a certain subpopulation, the one is that willing to rail that Fox is fake news when they report their poll showing that the public overall is believing Ford more than Kavanaugh, but they disgust most everyone else.
There is a group of men I think who remember doing things that they now regret having done in high school, and who would not want to have to even admit to having been that boy, let alone to have themselves judged now for then. But in college is a bit more adult and penis in the face, let alone the possibility of getting a woman drunk in order to take turns using her to masturbate inside of (and what is described is not “having sex”) … this gets more to Roy Moore level and these men thinking of their wives, sisters, and daughters, than of themselves. Family concern comes before political tribe for all but the most partisan.
I’m confident that if asked directly, Kavanaugh would— after doing some quick math in his head— readily pinky-swear that he has not raped or tried to rape anyone in the past seven years.
That’s depends on the reaction of the base. I did some checking of Conservative outlets both crazies like Breitbart and more normal ones like Townhall, National Review as well as WSJ are holding firm that confirmation should proceed. For now. Unlike Moore where only the crazies were supporting him.
If the base demands a fight, then it’ll happen. I suspect it really depends on how Thursday goes. If he holds up and Ford gets cut to shreads* it’ll go ahead. If not, then its over.
*I suspect, if they do decide to fight, they are going to hammer Prof Ford during her appearance, which would not have been the case before Sunday. From what I have read of the Thomas-Hill saga, it was the hearings which got public opinion on his side.
That is the dilemma for GOP senators and the reason for D partisans to have hope that this drags out.
As 538 today notes primaries have been won not by pragmatists or by virtue of any particular issue; they have been won by those Trump has endorsed. It is hard for them, within their own base, to go against what Trump wants. But the rest of the public had Kavanaugh as an unpopular choice before Ford came out, more so since with more seeing her as truth-telling than him, and the latest bits? Yet they have to repeat the talking points, even as they know how they goes over overall.
I am going to say this say with the greatest of respect. Unless you were working in the White House or were a Federal Judge, you cannot compare your background check would what Kavanaugh or anyother similarly placed person went through. It would be stupidity to do so. Lots of people have security clearances. Something approaching a million in fact. They don’t treat every one the same. People at the top of the pyramid get examined in excrutiatingly minute detail. They would look for substance abuse problems as well as sexual proclivities. And something like “he ran a gangrape group when he was a teenager” is something that you would expect to be discovered in such a check. As Ashtura says, the fact it might not have, would be worrying on its own.
Interestingly Kavanaugh was chosen since he was seen as more moderate on the issue of abortion, then Trumps perferred choice, Amy Coney Bennett. Who will be more difficult to oppose.
I have been involved in two high-level appointments requiring extensive background checks similar to what a federal COA judge gets. You are simply wrong to believe they do any kind of investigation into whether acquiantances might have sexual assault claims. They spend a ton of time looking at stuff like tax payments going back many years, but the interviews with people two or three degrees removed from the nominee are very cursory. They would never have talked to someone like Ford or Ramirez. They would have talked to Judge. What would you expect him to have said, exactly?
I’m sure it was a lot more than I experienced, but why would we expect all this would be discovered? For one thing, there are a non-trivial number of other judges at various levels who were forced to resign after incidents of bad behavior were discovered. If the background checks didn’t prevent them from getting through, why would they stop Kavanaugh (if the allegations are true)? Powerful men have been getting away with this kind of shit for centuries, with the system in their pocket. Why would anyone expect that the system has suddenly improved to the point that powerful men won’t be able to get away with it any longer purely on the basis of background checks?
So no, I would not expect that this stuff would be found out in a general background check, without specific allegations.
According to this report, the reporters who brought out the latest allegation did not originally hear it from her. That conversations among people who knew about it started the rumor that pointed to her as the victim, and the reporters then went to her, rather than the other way around, and she was reluctant. Took six days before she agreed.
However, The New York Times reported that it had “interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge.”