Sex as a political weapon?

As to the question of what Ford could gain - not much except to be a crucified martyr for the resistance which may fit her temperament

What does she have to gain? Wealth, lots of it. There are multiple Gofundme accounts like this one totaling over $1M and counting. She'll have a book deal and possibly a movie deal within a year. There is a lot of money in being a woman who makes false rape allegations against prominent Republican men.
 
More relevant but you can't prove a negative. However, you also can't prove a person's recollections to be correct. If a person claims to have vivid recollections of their previous lives or vivid recollections of being kidnapped and probed by aliens, it doesn't mean those things happened. Memory is not a video recorder. There are key themes, sensations, points of attention, but the act of recollecting is synthetic, creation of narrative and the narrative that develops over repetition need not be something that is like what happened or may be something that never happened as in the cases above and the scandals of the false memories created by therapists in the 80s. If alcohol was involved the situation is even more muddled as the experience of what was going on is probably not even consistent with what happened. Alcohol can change your perception of other people's intentions and the meaning of events.

What we have is a big stink over something that, if remembered correctly by the accuser would be something distasteful that happened when people were incapacitated by alcohol while their brains had not developed adult impulse control, hormones are new and none of the career planning and responsibility of adulthood had even been considered. If the judge had egregious decisions on the bench and terrible opinions in the court record then they should be attacking him with those - but they aren't. The Democrats have invested everything in a last minute attack - because nobody thought to destroy his career years ago when he had less power.

This mystery can only be solved by Shirley McLaine, a Ouija board, and a psychic

 
DoTQt45XoAAteE2.jpg


DoTdhN0VsAETG7O.jpg
 
Every person Ford identified as being at the party has signed sworn statements that it didn’t happen, including Ford’s female friend who supposedly was there that night.

Ford basically accused her best friend Leland Keyser of submitting a false statement about the party not happening.
Do you realize that you are making things up?

Ford's friend did not sign a statement saying that the party did not happen. She stated that she does not remember attending the party that Ford is referencing.

In addition, she made her lawyer release a separate statement confirming that she in fact believes Ford's accusations.
“Ms. Keyser does not refute Dr. Ford’s account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford’s account”
 
What we have is a big stink over something that, if remembered correctly by the accuser would be something distasteful that happened when people were incapacitated by alcohol while their brains had not developed adult impulse control, hormones are new and none of the career planning and responsibility of adulthood had even been considered. If the judge had egregious decisions on the bench and terrible opinions in the court record then they should be attacking him with those - but they aren't.
When the Republicans initiated impeachment procedures against Bill Clinton, they did so because he lied under oath and not specifically because he had participated in oral intercourse with a co-worker.

Whether or not Ford correctly identified Kavanaugh as the person who sexually assaulted her, we do know that a nominee for a life-time appointment to the highest and most respected court in the United States blatantly lied to the justice committee about his drinking habits. A former classmate of Kavanaugh, who is a registered Republican, had this to say:
"Our judicial system is based on the foundation of truth," she added. "And if you have a judge that lies to you, how can you trust the judicial system?"

Last but not least, the icing on the cake is that federal judge Kavanaugh was never of - cue overly dramatic sound effect - legal drinking age during his entire time in college in Maryland... (Source)
 
When the Republicans initiated impeachment procedures against Bill Clinton, they did so because he lied under oath and not specifically because he had participated in oral intercourse with a co-worker.

..and thus explains your outrage.
 
When the Republicans initiated impeachment procedures against Bill Clinton, they did so because he lied under oath and not specifically because he had participated in oral intercourse with a co-worker.
Correct - and I presume that you are making the case that it will be the lying not the accusations that will undo Kavanaugh as you point out:
Whether or not Ford correctly identified Kavanaugh as the person who sexually assaulted her, we do know that a nominee for a life-time appointment to the highest and most respected court in the United States blatantly lied to the justice committee about his drinking habits.

The game is to set someone up to defend themselves against an accusation which may be true but needn't be - but it is necessary for it to be salacious and Jerry Springer worthy so that people will be triggered and their critical faculties will not be engaged. Then grill them and either make the charge stick or use their testimony to say something like: "See, when people try to destroy his reputation, career and life with accusations of a sexual nature he get's upset. That sort of irrational person isn't who we want on the bench." - if a woman was being so challenged for a position a bit of angry shouting and maybe some crying would prove that the allegations were false and she was a deeply feeling person of character. Or we find that he glossed over some facts that could have made allegations (even if false) look stronger in which case we get them for lying.

The people who liked Clinton watched this treatment of him and even if they thought he did have an affair and even if they thought it was wrong, they doubled down on his side because of the transparency and hypocrisy of the attacks. I can';t really see this charade leading to anything other than a further digging in.

But this is hardly about Kavanaugh or the Supreme Court. If not Kavanaugh then it will be someone else. It's about the midterms. Nobody believes the Russia story any more (or it doesn't move the needle in focus groups anymore because all the customers for that story have brought it already) so they are back to - the GOP is the party of hate towards women. If Trump then puts up a black trans lesbian who owes him some huge favour for the job, then where is the ammo gonna come from to fight that? If he had someone like that up his sleeve it would be hilarious of course, but when would you play that card if you had it? Closer to the mid-terms to knock the wind out of the last minute organising and steal media attention or earlier so that people would have to watch the Dems either cave to a Trump choice or fight against an oppressed minority? That's just idle speculation on my part but there's enough money in Washington to keep armies of professional strategists on the payroll and all sides will be polishing their scripts for the top few likely scenarios.
 
CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOKS WERE SCRUBBED

On Monday Sept. 17th, Christine Blasey Ford’s high school yearbooks suddenly disappeared from the web. I read them days before, knew they would be scrubbed, and saved them. Why did I know they would be scrubbed? Because if roles were reversed, and Christine Blasey Ford had been nominated for the Supreme Court by President Trump, the headline by the resistance would be this:

CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD AND THE DRUNKEN WHITE PRIVILEGED RACIST PLAYGIRLS OF HOLTON-ARMS.

And it would be an accurate headline. That’s why the yearbooks have been scrubbed. They are a testament to the incredible power these girls had over their teachers, parents and the boys of Georgetown Prep, Landon and other schools in the area. In the pages below, you will see multiple photos and references to binge drinking and the accompanying joy of not being able to remember any of it.


Link #2

Untitled-e1537463483404.jpg
 
54 sexual partners during high school?
It's kids in the 80s - highschool, college a bit of stats padding or stats trimming for both sexes was the norm - and depended on who you were talking to. I don't know what it's like now but when I went to highschool in Alberta the drunken party scene with the awkward kissing and groping. Hard to know what was really true, who was just bragging, who was just playing pure.
 
Ford Claimed She Has Two Front Doors Because Kavanaugh Assaulted Her, Records Show That’s False

“The door was not an escape route but an entrance route,” said an attorney familiar with the ongoing congressional investigation. “It appears the real plan for the second front door was to rent out a separate room.”

Palo Alto city records show that a building permit for an additional room and exterior door was issued to Ford and her husband on Feb. 4, 2008 — more than four years before the May 2012 therapy session where, she says, she first identified Kavanaugh as her attacker.

All the remodeling, including a new bathroom, was completed by February 2010. The only additional permits issued to Ford at her Palo Alto address are for “solar panels” on the roof, a “solar hot water system” in the garage, and an “electric vehicle charge station” for the driveway — all of which were issued after 2012.

Since the second front door was installed, moreover, students from local colleges have lived in the additional room with the private door. In fact, under congressional questioning Thursday, Ford testified she has “hosted” various other residents there, including “Google interns.”
 
When the Republicans initiated impeachment procedures against Bill Clinton, they did so because he lied under oath and not specifically because he had participated in oral intercourse with a co-worker.

Whether or not Ford correctly identified Kavanaugh as the person who sexually assaulted her, we do know that a nominee for a life-time appointment to the highest and most respected court in the United States blatantly lied to the justice committee about his drinking habits. A former classmate of Kavanaugh, who is a registered Republican, had this to say:


Last but not least, the icing on the cake is that federal judge Kavanaugh was never of - cue overly dramatic sound effect - legal drinking age during his entire time in college in Maryland... (Source)
this should help fill out some details:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying
 
this should help fill out some details:
And just as with Clinton, those that support him will see this as petty bullying when he's been put on the spot and we all know what the "real" answer should be, and those that are against him will see it as pretty much the same thing but proclaim it as a total gotcha. I've got friends on both sides of this and this moves no-one but entrenches them. I guess there are people who will say face-to-face whatever they need to say so that they don't get accused of "hating women" but it's not changing minds, just shutting mouths. Not a lot of people stood up during the Clinton hearings to declare that infidelity was OK, but when the dust settled the popular sentiment swung more to his side than against.

I read that Brett wrote an opinion calling Elizabeth Warren's proposed bank regulations unconstitutional. You'ld think that might be something we could talk about - but then again, the Democrats are just as much against bank regulation as the Republicans are.
 
Back
Top