#ACTING
Posted on 09/17/2018 5:46:22 AM PDT by Lazamataz
American politics have been roiled in the last 48 hours by a last-minute attempt by Democrats and political operatives to sink Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the United States Supreme Court.
After all public and private hearings were over, Sen. Feinstein revealed a letter she had in her possession since July of this year, accusing Judge Kavanaugh of some teenage, high-school groping of a girl at a party. This girl, now a woman in her 50’s, has come forward and is willing to testify before the confirmation vote. Any reasonable person, not motivated by sheer partisan politics, might wonder about the following:
There is a reason that there are Statute of Limitation laws. Points of information are very hard to prove or disprove decades later, especially without report or recording of them. It is easy to convict (or exonerate) a person, if fuzzy facts from more than three decades ago are taken as Gospel.
Furthermore, this woman presumes to have only recently recalled these events. How odd! If it was such a debilitating blow, as she asserts, would not the event stand out clearly in her mind? Yet she cannot remember important data about it. She cannot remember with certainty the date, the location’s address, and has even changed the number of alleged ‘assailants’ from four to two.
Even if the facts are as she recites (which is highly questionable), Kavanaugh was a teenager at the time. Without question he was different then. All of us were. In fact, I defy anyone to say that they have not made foolish decisions as a teenager -- even in the sexual arena.
But is drunken teenage groping a crime? It is not. It is typical teenage behavior, especially in the 1980’s. However, the woman, Christine Blasey Ford, is making increasingly serious charges. She makes them, without proof of any nature and with very questionable facts and recollections.
She says that she felt Kavanaugh was trying to remove her clothing. Yet, she admits he did not. She says she felt that Kavanaugh was trying to have intercourse with her. Yet, she admits he did not. She says she felt that Kavanaugh was trying to hurt her. Yet, she admits he did not.
So what shall be the standard of ‘conviction’, with the subsequent revocation of his nomination? Shall the standard be the ‘feelings’ of a girl (who only remembered the event five years ago), or the facts she admits are true?
And how long into a person’s past should a person be investigated? Are we to now consider every event from Kindergarten and on? Do we need to bring forth charges of bullying when a person swings a fist at another on a third-grade playground? Are we to discard all nominees for their act of swiping a candy bar from a drug store at the age of 7? Do we need to hold Congressional Hearings every time we hear that little Sammy dunked little Suzy’s pigtails in the inkwell?
This new set of trends are very troubling. I suggest that, in the spirit of the #MeToo Movement, that a new hashtag emerge: #BeenSmearedToo.
Well no matter. Fox just reported that Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse is not stopping at Kavanaughs appointment to the Supreme Court, but if he lied to the FBI, he will be impeached from his current court seat.
You are the 409th Satisfied Customer!™
#ACTING
Saw a twitter thread about Kavenaugh’s name being offered in 2012 as Romney’s potential first SC nominee.
Leads to suspicion that she put the “memory” on record with her analyst to be able to use it for just such an “emergency”.
Frankly (pardon the pun), I don’t see the relevance.
“Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?”- Ray Donovan, 1987
I don't give a sh!t about the FBI (in case that hasn't been made clear), but I do care about senior government people who must use these background checks when making personnel decisions.
If Brett Kavanaugh lied to the FBI in any way, he should be thrown out of office on his ass.
The irony here is that if his nomination is blocked over this, then it will ultimately be a failure of the Beltway Republican establishment that bred and groomed him for years.
Kavenough's Judge mama ruled against CB-F's parents in a foreclosure property matter in 1996.
DiFi dug CB-F out of the swampness and attained a statement from her.
Genesis.
Smeared,
Yup.
Actually, I give them some credit. Even though this was a Sunday-breaking story, I've heard positive things from Whitehorse, Grassley, and Graham.
Gasp! There’s a Laz ping list? Well, put me on it posthaste.
As I mentioned elsewhere.... “I don’t see the relevance, since this was a purely administrative signoff on the judge’s part. This was not a court-related or adversarial thing.”
You are the 410th Satisfied Customer!™
The political scrum are going to be dealt with like Graham was at McRino’s funeral. This nonsense will be stopped.
You are the 411th Satisfied Customer!™
You misspelled 'scum'.
I phone is difficult to type with
Meanwhile our fearless Republicans are busy.
GRABBING THEIR ANKLES AWAITING THE DEMOCRATS.
This is exactly what I think happened. These people are like terrorists. They are in a war with Republicans and all right-thinking Americans and believe that any weapon they can use is acceptable. Christine Blasey Ford is the "suicide bomber" they were looking for.
From another thread
Last night I found a tweet that had a picture of professor ratings at ratemyprofessor.com. I posted a link to the tweet on another thread. Now, the tweet is gone, and the website has restricted views on Christine Ford. Needless to say, the reviews were not good. Apparently she can be very mean and vindictive if students don’t agree with her.
143 posted on 9/17/2018, 9:49:40 AM by Rusty0604
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.