What timing eh? Magical memory lapse of remembrance.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/16/politics/christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh/index.html
Remember, when hanging out with women, don't be drunk, don't touch them, or even talk of them with your friends or behind their back. Never know when they'll use it on you if you're a person in power (and is actually innocent of course).
What she describes is a lot more serious than an attempted kiss or something though. He held her down and groped her for a while.
shareThere was another witness in the room that says nothing happened. So a possible Anita Hill- Clarence Thomas situation but Thomas now is a Supreme.
shareTrue. I think the accusation is too old to be a factor in the vote.
We'll see. She seems very credible and has taken a polygraph. I still think the odds are that he'll still be confirmed, since it would require both Collins and Murkowski to both vote no to deny the confirmation, but Dems still need to do everything they can to kill this nomination.
shareShe is a political activist making a claim about "misconduct" decades after the fact. She doesn't seem credible. You just seem biased.
shareProve it. How is she a 'political activist'?
Your problem is everything you say is bullshit which is why you're incapable of backing up anything you say. That's also why no one takes you seriously.
[deleted]
Republicans have the deciding vote. I’m not saying she’s a liar. I just think Kavanaugh will get the votes.
share[deleted]
It wouldn't surprise me with the questions he came up with to ask Clinton under oath. That shit was explicit as all hell. In no reality would a democrat ask any politician those kinda questions today, and I doubt any republican would either. Eeeesh.
shareHmm? What type of question are you referring to?
shareThe list of questions asking the details of Clinton's encounter with Lewinsky.
shareIs there a public recording of this by chance? Was this during some senate hearing with Bill?
shareI'm not sure if these are all, but here are some:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/kavanaugh-clinton-questions-713428/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-hearing-grassley/index.html
It irks me how CNN spouts 'It will be a public reckoning of a woman's courage, a man's character and the capacity of Washington's leaders to show that some things matter more than politics.'
What courage is there for her withholding it until this very moment? She was fine with him doing any other shit and getting away with it for 36 years (even after the #metoo started) until when he's being nominated for the supreme court? Oh how courageous of her... give me a break.
Note: I never said she shouldn't be heard or not believed... Just the timing of it all...
What do you mean "she was fine with him doing any other shit and getting away with it for 36 years"?! What would ever make you think she was fine with it?
Did you even read her public op-ed in the WaPO? She never told anyone about it until it came out in couple's therapy with her husband in 2012 as she was trying to save her marriage. I never got any impression she was ever "fine with it", just too traumatized to tell anyone, even her husband until traumatized to the point it was affecting her marriage.
So do you seriously think she would have set up a lie about Kavanaugh in her couple's therapy in 2012 just in case he was nominated to the Supreme Court? That's insane!
And you're questioning her courage now, are you fucking out of your mind? You don't recognize that it takes courage to face the mob and make the allegations she's making now knowing she'll be dragged through the mud? She's a well respected prof at Palo Alto and adjunct professor at Stanford; she's 51 years old and has a comfortable life. How could it not take courage? Ever heard of Anita Hill? How could it not take courage to step into Hill's shoes knowing the shit Hill had to put up with?
And why would you think she should have been under any obligation to come forward sooner? It's not like she's going to the police, she's coming forward now because he was nominated to the Supreme Court and we should all want to ensure that Supreme Court justices are of the highest moral character because they have the final word on our federal laws. It's because of justices with shady moral character in the past that we're in the present quagmire we're in now (Bush v Gore, Citizens United to name two pivotal and worst decided cases of the last 50 years determined by rank partisanship and moneyed interests instead of what was fair or best for the American people), you don't see why that's important?
[deleted]
Even Pelosi admits it's BS. Plus it looks like she won't appear under oath.
share