There are exactly three people named in this sordid tale. The accuser cannot remember the date, or even year, when the party occurred. She doesn’t remember whose house it was at, only that it was near a golf course (which I’m certain is very common in the area). She names Kavanaugh and this fellow named Judge, but doesn’t remember anyone else at the party.
Oh, and this is a “repressed memory” that she suddenly “recovered” in 2012 (with the assistance of her therapist).
Kavanaugh has stated that he never attended a party like the one she describes - and he did so in unequivocal terms. That leads me to suspect that he didn’t attend ANY such parties in high school.
Judge has stated that the events in the tale never happened, although he admits to being a wild child as a teen.
Kavanaugh’s direct statement in denial is key to the destruction of Blasey-Ford’s tale. Coupled with the changing nature of her yarn, the direct denial, alongside the explicit contradiction the described behavior as witnessed to by at least 65 females who knew Kavanaugh from that time, promises that Blasey-Ford will indeed be “destroyed” by the falling weight of her self-constructed house of cards.
“Kavanaugh’s direct statement in denial is key to the destruction of Blasey-Ford’s tale. Coupled with the changing nature of her yarn, the direct denial, alongside the explicit contradiction the described behavior as witnessed to by at least 65 females who knew Kavanaugh from that time, promises that Blasey-Ford will indeed be “destroyed” by the falling weight of her self-constructed house of cards.”
Amen - and here’s hoping Judge K. has his own version of Justice Thomas’ “high-tech lynching” statement ready to go for Monday. He has nothing to lose by going “all-in” to call out such shady and libelous tactics with sketchy information from 4 decades ago. His statement should call the committee and the Senate to account for losing control of their process to those with an anti-government agenda.
His statement should avoid any flavor of responding to the charges which are merely a version of “when did you stop beating your wife?” He should boldly proclaim his record of community service and judicial decisions that have stood for review. Also point out the numerous times he has undergone an FBI background check without the slightest hint of impropriety. While never attacking his accuser directly, the background checks, the intervening time, and the support letter from 65 female classmates should be pushed at every instance as evidence contrary to a charge from a “recovered memory” from the mists of time and an alcohol-fueled party.
For those who give any weight to the potential for him to be impeached from his current seat on the appeals bench, I seriously question that the Senate could muster the necessary 2/3 vote to do so, even if they win in November, which I consider very unlikely. This entire episode ought to ensure the three at-risk D seats, Manchin et al, become a rout for the R candidates. If I were one of those candidates, this entire episode would feature strongly in my advertising and campaign speeches.