Come on guys, if Mohammad “Bret” Kazan and I were at a party around 2002/2003 and he told me how much he hates America and wants to do some terrorist stuff, and I thought he was being silly until 15 years later when he was going to be in a position to actually cause some harm, everyone should just ignore my accusation because how’s he possibly going to rebut something so vague?
I’m sure that’s what the FBI would do, and UV would probably cool with that.
“What date was the conference on?”
“I don’t recall - sometime during the summer of 1983.”
“Where was it held?”
“I don’t recall - it was in a hotel.”
Regards,
Shodan
Thankfully, the Senate will be conducting an investigation into these credible allegations, and we’ll find out in the next few weeks (or maybe longer) what they find out.
Again, this is ridiculous. If you tell me, credibly, that you were in a situation in the early eighties where you’d plausibly have been around Kavanaugh, and you tell me, credibly, the names of some of his buddies (who have contemporaneous admissions of heavy drinking and of a desire to commit violence against folks like you), and you tell me that at some conference you were assaulted by him, and you show me therapy records that are consistent with the story, then your story isn’t an open-and-shut case, but it certainly warrants further investigation.
Not knowing the address at which it happened, or not knowing the date on which it happened, is consistent with remembering the important details of a decades-old assault.
Interesting, if confusing, wrinkle: The Kav denies being at “the party”. Is this the same party which Ms Ford does not remember the date and place? If she did not specify, how can he know which party he wasn’t at? (This might prove to be just a hiccup in the news spasm…)
Kavanaugh Furiously Lobbies Senators, Denies He Was At Party In Question
(Link included for propriety’s sake, it is likely crawling with liberal cooties. Festooned, even…)
What has Kazan done in the 15 years since then? Has he led a respectable and accomplished life in the public eye? Or is he hanging around extremist circles?
From the collected papers of Judge Kavanaugh:
2001 email:
Great work, ----, and thanks for hooking everything your weak crew. Check will be in the mail once I get your new address. Excellent time. Apologies to all for missing Friday (good excuse), arriving late Saturday (weak excuse), and growing aggressive after blowing still another game of dice (dont recall).
Reminders to everyone to be very, very vigilant w/r/t confidentiality on all issues and all fronts, including with spouses.
2014 speech to Yale’s Federalist chapter:
True story. On the bus, he actually had his book out and was reading his notes while people were doing group chugs from a keg. He got a P. I think the people doing the group chugs got H’s. Fortunately for all of us, we had a motto, what happens on the bus stays on the bus. Tonight, you can modify that to what happens at the Fed Soc after-party stays at the Fed Soc after-party.
Without knowing exactly what he said, it’s hard to criticize it. Maybe he said: I was never at a party which matches the description she has given. I don’t recall ever interacting with her at any party.
If he was smart, he would use “I don’t recall” rather than “I was not”. I certainly can’t recall every party I was at in high school.
You mean has he been concealing his true intentions from his masters as he works his way into a position of power, only to reveal the true extend of his long con as he brings down the government from the inside?
Your definition of reasonable and credible are a universe apart from mine. So much so that use of the words are meaningless.
If the therapist’s notes were consistent with her allegation, then I’d say that’s pretty damn convincing. My understanding is that the therapist’s notes are different than her story, and while she claims she named him, there’s no evidence of that. So when you say she told her therapist, that could be true. But there’s no evidence to suggest that it is.
This is why the FBI needs to investigate the matter. They could interview the therapist and discuss the notes. They are pros not only in criminal investigation, but also background checks.
I should have said, it’s pretty convincing she believes her story to be true, not necessarily that the story is true.
My understanding is that the notes are only slightly different, but that will probably come out in the coming investigation. Words like “credible” are in the eye of the beholder, quite obviously. YMMV.
Do you have something that contradicts this basic info?
Only a minor discrepancy, which she addresses in a way that makes sense, and yes the notes don’t include his name, but honestly, what’s the alternative? She was assaulted by some other prep school kid and thought, “Ah ha, I can use these notes to accuse anyone now!”
Brett art has done this before, by the way.
To be honest, I don’t even go that far. I don’t like making calls within 48 hours of a story breaking. I like suspending judgment. That aside: yup. But I can imagine constructing a friendly even money wager in her favor at this point, with regards to whether something happened.
I will also say that the allegations are sufficiently credible to warrant careful investigation by professionals.
I like waiting a couple of days to see if other information emerges, as a general rule. I doubt whether this practice will be vindicated in the this instance though.
So maybe you will answer the question: If I tell the story, but I don’t have the names of his buddies because I allege that we were alone, do we toss my allegations in the dumpster, or do I get to be in front of the Judiciary Committee?
Unfortunately I don’t think they will be able to stop Kavanaugh, even despite these recent allegations.
They are allegations. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they are in fact true, but there is simply no way to know. There is no proof; there is no legal process surrounding it; it is indeed the proverbial “he said - she said” thing. Kavanaugh knows this. He knows there’s no way of proving it and that anything more that comes out about it is still just going to be, in legal terms, hearsay. So he is going to simply dig in and deny.
This strategy is more likely to succeed than to issue any kind of apology or give any credence to the idea that it may have happened.
…we can readily dismiss your accusation as not credible because we have you on record as admitting that you made it up.
If you have any evidence that Ford has admitted making up her claim then I will happily dismiss her claim as not credible, just as I’ve dismissed your claim because you concede your claim is not true.
Dammit autocorrect. That was supposed to be Breitbart.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk