Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/26/2018 5:14:19 AM PDT by EyesOfTX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: EyesOfTX
(hat tip luckofdeirish).......her evidence includes therapy questions about assault, violence, drug use etc,
all normal subjects in a clinical interview.....This is distinctly different from: “Ford went into therapy in 2012
after she realized her life couldn’t move forward without resolving this event”.....
2 posted on 09/26/2018 5:26:54 AM PDT by Liz ( Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EyesOfTX

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/26/kavanaugh-accuser-submits-four-declarations-from-people-says-corroborate-her-assault-allegations.html


3 posted on 09/26/2018 5:44:51 AM PDT by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EyesOfTX; PGalt
McConnell and Grassley are doing the only thing they can at this point. I hope it pans out, but it might not.

This is just another routine example of the crying need to sue "the MSM” - read, the Associated Press and its members, joint and several liability - into oblivion. Judge Kavanaugh must sue. If his confirmation fails, it would appear that he has no option at all but to do so, but either way it is necessary.

Many good FReepers think that Roy Moore is a flake, and I understand that. Under current law, what he legally did in the past is a crime. I get it. But that aside, Judge Moore was subjected to exactly the same sort of “testimony” on the basis of “recovered memory” (not truly “recovered,” but synthesized by brainwashing techniques in psychoanalysis). Such a memory is indistinguishable from reality to the patient herself or to anyone listening to the patient. Great testimony, right? Not so fast. Such a “memory” can be of an “event” which never, in the real world, happened at all.

I agree with the Scot Adams assertion that “nobody is really the same person for 20 years.” I would illustrate that point by asking, “If twenty years ago you saw your wife as she is now, would you have given her a second glance?” That does not reflect on your love for your wife, then or now, but on the fact that you are actually not now the same guy. And neither is she the same gal.

From that perspective alone it is absurd to drag up accusations from three and a half decades ago - always provided, of course, that they do not reflect the reputation of the person in question for the past 20 years. Throw in the fact that a third of the population of 35 years ago will have died in that time, and others will have completely lost their memory, and “We sit too long on trifles” is the only sensible response to consideration of a novel charge pertaining to a 35-years-ago putative event.

And journalism as we know it must be sued into oblivion for promoting it. When I say, “oblivion,” I mean that the damages must be so severe that the institutions responsible will have their attitudes permanently adjusted. The restitution must include conducting a propaganda campaign in favor of the plaintiff until polling data shows conclusively that the plaintiff’s just reputation has been restored.

That just might get their attention!


4 posted on 09/26/2018 6:10:31 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (Journalism promotes itself - and promotes big government - by speaking ill of society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EyesOfTX

Didn’t watch Murphy Brown - shocking, huh. Guessing she’s the real reason they dropped Roseanne.


6 posted on 09/26/2018 8:06:00 AM PDT by bgill (CDC site, "We don't know how people are infected with Ebola.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EyesOfTX

OK, happy the vote is scheduled. Thank God. What kind of vacuous human being is Murkowski to get her panties in a knot over an allegation from 36 years ago where the accuser can’t even get the time and place straight? Even so, he was a teenager for the love of God. What disqualifies one for the Senate? Because if we are to judge the Senate on what they did in the 1960s we would likely have to toss out the whole lot.

So if the Democrats are whipping the vote against why can’t our side whip Collins and Murkowski into action. Need another bridge to nowhere in Alaska? Fine, here’s the money. Now vote for Kavanaugh. Or would you rather never see yourself on a committee for the rest of your life?


8 posted on 09/26/2018 9:05:57 AM PDT by Sam Gamgee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson