Keith Ellison vice-chair of the DNC and representative from Minnesota chronically abused his ex-girlfriend and yet they just endorsed him for Attorney General of Minnesota.
Watch out for your daughters, sisters and any women you care about, because the Dems are coming to power and they just don't care.
And no, this did not happen when Ellison was a teenager. It was last year
1
I believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford
11
Imho, Mark Judge holds the key. Will he turn it?
If they can get him to testify, he can answer lots of questions about Brett:
1) Did you jump on them on the bed because you knew that was the only way to save Christine from rape?
2) Had you and Brett attacked other girls with the same modus operandi?
3) Did Brett brag about raping girls?
4) Did Brett get drunk to excuse his sexual assaults?
5) Can you name other girls Brett raped?
6) Can you name other boys who knew of Brett's sexual assaults?
7) Do you think Brett is qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?
8) Were the Jesuits at Prep aware of Brett's assault's on girls?
Etc. The FBI will be able to find all that information. But will Trump allow them to investigate the man he's expecting to prevent him from being indicted?
Mark's previous books were not big sellers, but this one could rocket him to #1 on the bestseller lists. Will he have the courage to tell what he knows, or has he already been silenced, intimidated, threatened?
13
Surely there needs to be some sort of bravery award - maybe a Golden Heart - for women courageous enough to stand up to the male establishment and the formidable and cruel “arsenal” of tactics it uses to try to discredit, demean and destroy any woman who dares to speak her truth about her sexual assault.
It’s appalling AND criminal that 27 years after Anita Hill was brutally grilled about her substantive accusations regarding current Justice Clarence Thomas that NOTHING HAS CHANGED and Professor Christine Blasey Ford will have to face the same type of tortuous examination while Kavanaugh gets the white glove treatment - and I emphasize white - from his rich, highly-placed friends and colleagues in the Senate, not to mention his fat orange friend in the Oval Office.
I’m disgusted, thoroughly disgusted with every single move that tRUMP and the GOP make, yet thoroughly inspired by every individual courageous enough to stand up to them.
To Christine Blasey Ford: Millions and millions of Americans believe, support and admire you - don’t forget that!
20
According to Brett Kavanaugh’s English teacher at Mater Dei Junior High School in Bethesda, Maryland, Kavanaugh repeatedly terrorized a legally blind student sitting in front of him with the metal side of a wood ruler. When caught he served a few days detention. I taught junior high English and can attest this behavior is not “normal” behavior of adolescents. The school should have some record of this.
16
Interesting to see Brett's yearbook page and Mark's yearbook page. I think Mark will be called to testify and will spill the beans on "Bart" O'Kavanaugh.
https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1042146479073374209/photo/1
12
It’s sad, but true: 27 years ago, when Anita Hill testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that Clarence Thomas harassed her, the majority in the committee dismissed it as a lie. Most of them were intimidated into accepting Justice Thomas’s angry denial of the charge, especially after he the all-white committee that what it was conducting was "high-tech lynching." That cheap play of the race card got Clarence Thomas confirmed as a justice on the Supreme Court.
Unfortunately for Judge Kavanaugh, the present committee is not all-male and not all-white, and both the accuser and the accused are white. As expected, he has denied the charge that he sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford, when he was 17 and she 15. According to Dr. Blasey, the only other person present in the room when the assault occurred was Kavanaugh's friend, Mark Judge.
There is no reason why any investigator should believe the “I have no recollection of that” statement from a man, who, on his own admission, had problem with alcohol as a teenager. Also, Kavanaugh was totally drunk when he assaulted occurred, according to Blasey. So his denial of the incident cannot be taken seriously either.
The decent thing for him to do would have been to give himself the benefit of the doubt about what happened over three decades ago, that too when inebriated, and apologize to Dr. Blasey. Most people, including Blasey, would have forgiven him. And he would have saved himself this embarrassment and humiliation.
7
Mark Judge will not testify and if I was his lawyer, I would advise him not to do so. He would be incriminating himself as an accessory to a crime. If the story is true, he is not an innocent bystander.
7
This is a mess. Nobody except she and the person she accuses knows what really happened. There are many troubling aspects of this from the timing, the way the Democrats made it public and her apparent inability to remember any but the most salacious details. I know we are told this is not unusual for an assault victim but this is not a routine accusation. She cannot simply be given the benefit of the doubt.
The best way to have handled this would have been a closed hearing in which a careful transcript was made. No posturing by either side necessary. Just try to get to the facts.
People who believe she should be treated delicately because of the circumstance of sexual assault are simply ignoring the fact that she jumped into the hottest political cauldron of the current period.
I find it ironic that the Democrats having pressed for a full hearing now apparently want to be able to set the rules as well. If that is the hang up, why doesn’t her lawyer say so rather than not respond to an invitation to appear?
This is not about someone using their power from position in life to get their way with women. We are talking about (if it happened) an inebriated teenager who has no other reported issues with women.
We will probably never know what, if anything, happened. But a public hearing is going to probably destroy both accused and accuser. Not that anyone in the coliseum known as Washington D.c. cares. Very unfortunate.
5
@Bob
No other REPORTED issues.
That's what the FBI investigation will do. Get the people who know what happened to REPORT to them what they know. Brett, like other boys, assaulted girls so they could BRAG about what they had done.
So many commenters criticize Dr. Blasey for not telling anyone, but no one has asked if Brett and Mark told anyone. Maybe they did, and maybe those men are ready to talk. Maybe those men care about the country and don't want to see Brett on the Supreme Court.
8
"there is no upside for women who come forward with stories of sexual harassment or assault, especially when the accused is a famous or powerful man. It doesn’t matter how credible the story is. Simply by telling it, a woman can expect to be pilloried in the press and suffer far worse on social media, if not in real life."
I think Ms. Ford is credible, and I don't think Kavanaugh should be on the bench, but let's be honest, the statement above doesn't really apply anymore.
Sure, Ms. Ford will face some condemnation, but she will also be lionized by the left, embraced by the media, and hailed as a liberal hero if she manages to scuttle Kavanaugh's confirmation. Regardless, she can write a book and make a fortune afterwards.
There's an upside, and people have lied for far less.
Just sayin'
6
The Editorial Board, begin by finger wagging at Republicans.
'Don’t engage with the specifics, just deny deny, deny.' Which makes one counter, don’t engage with the specifics, just accuse accuse accuse. What 'specifics' would these wise body of men/women advocate Kavanaugh engage with? This kind of testimony. 'Although it was nearly 40 years ago I remember clearly the carpet in that room... it was a bit threadbare...' Memory is notoriously selective that is why there are laws around time frames protecting those accused of supposed crimes. One is not defaming Kavanaugh's accuser by wondering that in the 40 year time span Kavanaugh has had many very senior well publicised appointments, so why did his accuser not come forward in those opportune moments. Further, is one allowed to point out that Kavanaugh's accuser is a Democrat who has made contributions to the Democratic Party and associated left wing causes. However Kavanaugh's accuser has a right to be heard and she is being heard on a national stage, one cant help but entertain the cynical thought that is what she wanted all along, for she had many opportunities before but this was the big opportunity. All this is politically deeply cynical which will deservedly lose Democrats votes in the mid-terms, for one feels the wider American public now refuse to be duped any further,
1
To me, almost everyone gets the essence of these scenarios wrong. It is a power struggle. Many men have power and the ability to control much of what goes on around them. Women usually are perceived to have less power (there are exceptions), and when a woman accuses or exposes sexual wrong doing the struggle for power and control ensues.
The tactics used to attack the accuser or dismiss her allogations diminishes her power further.
A paternalistic and entitled view point that is perpetuated in many societies and cultures is at the root of it all.
Women are not half a person. Men need to respect women as their equals. All sexual abuse, harrassment, and assaults are an abuse of power against those who are perceived to be lesser in some or many regards and always lesser in power.
That is the real message that needs to be understood and it is the core reason why Kavanaugh should not be appointed to the Supreme Court and make decisions that will impact the lives of millions when he really only respects half of the people in this country.
8
Monday is too soon to reconvene the Judiciary Committee.. these are serious allegations and everyone involved deserves a thorough investigation by the appropriate law enforcement agency before the committee members ask any questions of Professor Ford, who has risked her career to come forward. Mr. Trump further politicized this matter during this afternoon's press conference. He should dampen his powder, as should the opinionators until this matter is impartially investigated.
4
Dr. Ford cannot recall the date of the incident; she cannot recall the time of the incident. Furthermore, she has not ever stated whether or not she - at age 17 - had consumed alcoholic beverages, herself, on that occasion. Her credibility is seriously in question. Key in all of this is whether SHE had any alcohol which would, unquestionably, impair her memory and cognitive functioning. I am wondering why a 15 or 17 year old girl was even at a party where teenage drinking was ongoing, in the first place. Likely, at some point and at some social gathering i.e. drunken party, someone DID attempt to sexually assault her. What we don't know is who is was, when it was or what was her state of sobriety when the event happened. If she cannot even recall when and where why should she be anymore reliable as to recall who?
5
This editorial is an intellectually dishonest self righteous cry of moral indignation. It not even subtly convicts Judge Kavanaugh before any hearing occurs. Its call for a full FBI investigation is no more than an excuse to delay the nomination procedure.
No one, certainly not the editorial board, really cares about the woman involved. She is being completely exploited by politicians less concerned about her grievances than they are about using her as a political pawn.
Of course her allegations need to be heard. But they could have been and should have been in a context sensitive to her expressed desire for anonymity. Instead, she has been thrust into the public spotlight by politicians seizing a ( probably deliberately planned) opportunity to prevent Judge Kavanaugh's appointment when all else had failed.
This is not about Ms. Ford's honor or about any sincere effort to address her allegations. If it were, Senator Feinstein could have done so discreetly and effectively without creating an onslaught of unwanted publicity to Ms. Ford.
This is not about concern for Ms. Ford, despite the phony expressions of moral outrage, particularly by men who were probably not choir boys in their high school years. It is about preventing Judge Kavanaugh's appointment, at all cost, by any means, including the sacrifice of a woman who will be drawn into a partisan public circus, with no regard for the dignity and discretion she should be accorded by people who really cared.
4
Character development starts early. I like teenage boys who haven’t violently flung themselves on top of another human being, determined to get sexual gratification. Surely there must be thousands of boys who did not do this as teenagers who are qualified to take Kavanagh’s place on the bench.
After hours of hearings, this man is still a mystery with a long hidden paper trail. Trump doesn’t hire or even associate with the best people so we have the obligation to be suspicious.
9
I just read a redacted version of Blasey Ford's letter to Feinstein, She says she received medical treatment following the assault. That would be important corroborating contemporaneous evidence. Why hasn't anyone followed up on that?
3
This is a no-brainer. If Brett Kavanaugh did nothing, as he claims -- then he has nothing to lose and there's no reason why there shouldn't be hearing concerning these allegations.
But if on the other hand this turns out to be true, he would most certainly be a fit in the morally corrupt Trump White House, and would have no business sitting on the Supreme Court bench.
6
If I were these Republican senators, I'd be verrrrry careful in how I approach the questioning of Dr. Blasey.
The Doctor is probably as smart as they are (actually wrote a dissertation and defended it), just as good at speechifying (as a Professor) and has undergone the rigors of Departmental Faculty Meetings and other Univ. committees ( :) ).
They run the definite risk of being made a fool by this woman.
I sure hope so.
5
@RLG It couldn't happen to a more deserving group.
3
As a survivor of 3 sexual molestations I completely understand Ms. Ford’s reaction as a young teen. I told no one. I was ashamed and embarrassed.
It’s time that men and boys are accountable for their predatory behaviors.
8
An accusation is NOT a conviction. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. If all it takes is for one person to accuse any Supreme Court nominee of sexual harassment or any other crime, without proof, then prepare yourself for a bench with zero justices.
4
Senator Corker said on CNN that we need to restore "dignity, civility and decorum" to these proceedings that have been hijacked by the Democrats. By his side, his white male GOP colleagues nodded their heads. The hypocrisy of these men! As if there is any "dignity, civility and decorum" left in the GOP and WH. I talked to a female neighbor this morning, a moderate Republican. She said because of how the GOP is mishandling this situation, she is now not voting GOP this fall, and most likely not voting at all. She admitted that she, too, was sexually assaulted in high school. Women of all walks of life are watching this, and these old GOP men are still acting like it is 1991.
4
September 18, 2018
To command the honor for a seat on the high court's bench this event of his teenage happenings is surly worthy of best of Judge Kavanaugh judgment to show his grace to manage his command for and about justice and its interpretative atonement when give light of discourse to the degree worthy for the best rights in how law / laws are to guide everyone and for all adjudications albeit personal or collective staying the course for the historical narratives learning.
jja, Manhattan, N. Y.
1
Sewage is being enshrined as an America value under Trump. You can't go too low, and it seems, the lower, the better, in fact.
How far we have fallen from the shining city on the hill.
4
The ghost of Anita Hill will haunt the Republicans in Brett Kavenaugh's confirmation. Did Kavenaugh attack Blasey Ford 35 years ago? He denies it and she is haunted by it.
Four Key Senators are Murkowski, Collins, Flake and Corker, all Republicans, not on the Judiciary committee, will be decide if Kavanaugh is worthy of confirmation. Will they believe Blasey Ford? Will they believe that Kavenaugh lied in his hearings in 2006 and 2018?
4
I visited Iceland in 2017 shortly after a young woman had been murdered, a very rare occurrence in that country. She had last been seen walking down the street alone at night after the bars closed. She was murdered by two seamen from Greenland. I read accounts and reactions by other citizens and what struck me the most intensely is that not a single one blamed her. No one asked what she was wearing or why she was walking alone. They were incensed that someone attacked her while she was walking alone. They believed that anyone - male or female - should be safe at any time of day or night. It was a given. I am amazed by their attitude and ashamed of the country I live in where women are not free and are almost always blamed for any attack against them.
Ask the men abused by priests why they told no one and why they waited years to tell. After you have that data, get back to me on why women do the same thing.
I venture that 78% of women in this country have experienced unwanted sexual attention by everything from obscene phone calls, to flashers, to groping drunks at parties, men who rub up against you while standing in a line, to attempted and completed rape. You want to know why women are angry? Look to your own behavior and that of your buddies. We are sick of it! Times up. No more Anita Hills!
12
@nora m Thank you Nora. Their time is UP!
4
Ms. Ford should be heard, and she will be, but there’s no evidence whatsoever so Kavanaugh will still be confirmed.
Republicans are absolutely shameless, and they really don’t care if Kavanaugh did it or not. They just want their guy on the bench, so they’re willing to ignore what may have happened to this woman.
Democrats are equally shameless, they know this hearing won’t matter, but they also know it will enrage and mobilize women. They just want control of Congress, so they’re willing to exploit what may have happened to this woman.
This country really needs a viable third party.
4
What would the NYT Editorial Board like the senate to hear from Judge Kavanaugh (his correct title)? I'd like to know what evidence the left would accept to prove he is innocent? This claim is decades old and unprovable so how can he possibly defend himself from it.
4
@James
There is no set of facts, short of a confession, that will satisfy Judge Cavanaugh's critics because whenever they hear answers that don't confirm their predetermined beliefs they just claim he's "lied".
See how that works?
2
The Judiciary Committee should unanimously request the FBI to investigate properly, even if technically they might not have power to do so. Film clips of Republican Committee elders at the time of Anita Hill hearings and now suggest that they learned nothing from the Hill hearings. The Hill hearings were so poorly done partly because the FBI investigation then was merely two days in duration. Even so, that vote to confirm the clueless Thomas was 52-48.
4
Bill Clinton handled the accusations about Monica Lewinsky the wrong way. Brett Kavanaugh is wrong as well. If he was drunk chances are he doesn't remember it. A categorical denial under those circumstances means nothing. And how much mercy would Kavanaugh show a similarly accused teen today? Would he pat the teenaged boy on the head and say it's no big deal?
I was molested by the family doctor when I was a teenager. I never told my parents. Why? For the same reason Christine Blasey Ford didn't say anything at the time. No one was going to believe me over a trusted doctor. I was just some silly teenaged girl and, if he had actually molested me I'd probably asked for it. Funny how that attitude continues even now.
No one asks to be raped, molested, or sexually assaulted. I think that Kavanaugh's response shows us what he's made of and it's not good. He could have said that he doesn't remember it and that if he did do this he's very sorry and it was wrong.
The GOP ought to be ashamed of itself for the way its behaved during this entire process. I'm sure the information was out there but they didn't want to find it. Disgusting. Even more disgusting is having a Cheater in Chief who thinks nothing of bragging about feeling up women. These people deserve each other. But do we really deserve this?
3
If Dr. Blasey testifies Monday (and I read she has not yet replied she will), I can certainly understand her dismay at the turmoil her accusation has caused. She was correct in her original apprehension at coming forward; there are many people who have already mocked her, the president's son for one. There are also many people who have much to lose if Kavanaugh is not confirmed. I wish her well and hope she testifies, but also fear for her and her plight.
4
“I have no recollection of that,” Mr. Judge told The New Yorker in a story published on Friday — which sounds reasonable coming from someone who wrote a memoir, “Wasted,” about his struggles with teenage alcoholism."
The snark directed at this man for admitting alcoholism when a teenager is truly troubling. Shame on the NY Times editorial board for their dismissive attitude towards it.
5
@Jg I didn't read it as snarky. He struggled with teenage alcoholism and it's reasonable that he would have had blackouts.
2
As I've continued to process this, I realize that we're not talking about whether he should be punished or held to account in any meaningful way, but rather whether he should have the great privilege and power of sitting on the high court for a lifetime, including the power to affect how the law handles sexual assault. Even if he does not face criminal charges or disbarment, these actions, if found credible, should definitely exclude anyone from consideration for that position.
7
Well, it's one of the things that should exclude Kavanaugh. There were plenty of other valid reasons even before this latest problem became apparent.
7
@PeteH
Agreed. But this should rise to the top the heap!
Like having the amoral, incompetent, ignorant sexual predator Donald Trump in the Oval Office, Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court is a symptom of the collapse of our democracy under a one-party Republican state.
Get out the vote and take our nation back from these evil people.
7
What is troubling about this situation is that it sets a dangerous precedent, which very likely will be used against the Democrats in the future. We have a legal system premised on, among other things, the fact that memories and evidence fade over time, people are deemed innocent until proven guilty, we have a right to cross examine accusers with a jury, and juvenile crimes, if they occurred, are treated differently. We also don't as a matter of principle judge truthfulness based on the race, gender or political leanings of the speaker. All of these principles are being tossed out the window here, which sets a standard the GOP can use against Dems the next time around. Under the standard being applied to Kavanaugh, some of our finest leaders would have been torpedoed based on unproven (but credible) accusations--Clinton, multiple Kennedies, Johnson, FDR, and many others. How does Kavanaugh or anyone prove his innocence? Consider, for example, if the Duke Lacross team incident had not been debunked at the time, but had lain dormant for 30 years until a player was appointed to high office? How would that person defend himself at that point? None of this to is to say that she is lying, or that its not a serious issue, or that historically these situations have not been handled well. But if we start throwing out our principles of justice and due process where the alleged victim seems (and may be) truthful, we fundamentally damage our democracy, system and future.
13
Seriously? The way Anita Hill was treated 27 years ago by the GOP when she came forward with her accusations against Clarence Thomas was considered “normal”.
There were no women on the committee. It wasn’t safe for women to speak out 30 years ago.
The only protection a girl had in the Kavanaugh accusation back then was a one piece suitsuit.
3
@Chris
You're a bit mixed up. He isn't on trial. Talk of due process is out of place. It's essentially a job interview.
Some of our "finest leaders" SHOULD have been torpedoed due to abuse and mistreatment of women.
Sorry, but times are changing and such things didn't used to be taken seriously. Now they are!
Men will have to cope somehow - perhaps by recognizing that abusing a woman can come back to haunt them. It's about time.
6
@BBB You are missing the entire point of the post and overstating your case. Whether Anita Hill situation was handled correctly or not is not the issue. The issue is due process, and fundamental principles of our legal system--and again, I am no fan or Trump or BK or the GOP. Are you prepared, for example, to have future Democratic nominees derailed because someone said something happened 30 years ago when they were teenagers--or is it to be based entirely on whether you happen to find them credible--what if I do and you don't ? Did you find the Duke Lacross allegations credible (most people appeared to)? If so you were wrong then, and you could be now, or not--the point is no one but maybe them knows. It is also not true that women, 30 years ago, were completely unprotected. I have been directly involved in the legal system for almost 30 years, and I can tell you that rape was routinely, aggressively and regularly prosecuted even in the 80's. Again, that is not to say it was perfect, it certainly was not, and is not, but it was not a crazy frat house where everything went unpunished and women were free to be assaulted.
1
There is much here to disagree with the individual who penned this op-ed. At the very top, however, is the opinion writer's characterization of the accusations as "detailed...". The accusations have variably included 2 individuals and 4 individuals. Do not have a date, time, or place. Were not re-collected in ANY format until nearly 30 years after the fact. In their original form did NOT include a named culprit. Despite, the author's assertion to the contrary the accusation does cary hallmarks of a false accuser - 1) she has motive (it is clear she has been an active anti-conservative protester - obviously not pathognomonic, but certainly provides a viable motive) 2) her story is so vague in verifiable details, yet specific in emotionally disturbing details (no place or date and no ID of any other's present other than the accused) 3) her story has changed in very important details - going from 4 attackers to 2 and going from not indicating names to naming Judge Kavanaugh only when naming him would lead to notoriety. 4) She has a history of vindictive behavior as reported by her students.
12
@JP
The "detailed" accusations are indeed inconsistent:
"Notes from an individual therapy session the following year, when she was being treated for what she says have been long-term effects of the incident, show Ford described a “rape attempt” in her late teens."
Note the words "late teens" in the above quote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/california-professor-write...
Yet, as this editorial states: "Christine Blasey Ford, now a psychology professor at Palo Alto University, says she was 15 years old on the night in question"
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Sorry, but 15 is not even close to "late teens".
4
Dr. Blasey’s accusation deserves more than just a hearing where two people testify before a committee and the cameras. It deserves a full investigation by the FBI who should be interviewing Mark Judge, Blakey and Kavanaugh, but also their friends and acquaintances from the time of the alleged assault. Kavanaugh has already demonstrated his skill in evading questions. But his prep school wingman, Mark Judge, who is already on record as a sexually predatory blackout drunk might be more readily compelled to come clean to avoid perjury charges. One suspects the same is likely true of some of Kavanaugh’s other classmates. But we are unlikely to find out without a proper investigation. If such an investigation further delays a confirmation vote, that is a small price to pay to avoid having two Supreme Court Justices widely believed to be guilty of sexual misconduct.
3
MeToo has been weaponized as a political tool, and what goes around will come around.
All it takes is an allegation. No proof needed whatsoever.
Who’s the next target?
Warren? Kamala? Beato? Spartacus?
11
@RS
"MeToo has been weaponized as a political tool, and what goes around will come around"
Oh, yes. For centuries, men could abuse and attack women with impunity. Suddenly, men are finding there may be repercussions after all. Karma's a you-know-what!
Don't pretend you were a fan of MeToo until it was "weaponized." I'm willing to bet you've always believed what you believe - that women cry rape and it's always "He said, she said," what can you do?
2
Let's get this clear: sexually attacking a woman is a crime, not a teenage caprice.
There's a lot of underprivileged teenagers in our prison system who did not go to prep school and who were tried as an adult and will now have this record for the rest of their life.
Yes. Crimes as a teenager are relevant and need a proper investigation when uncovered three months later, three years later, or thirty years later. Just ask the American gymnasts.
83
@Sherrie Of course they're relevant. That doesn't mean that the burden of proof is suddenly shifted to the accused.
8
@Sherrie, so you were screaming at the top of your lungs at Mrs. Clinton while she was attacking all the women that accused President Clinton right?
7
@Sherrie
Well said, thank you.
1
Kavanaugh’s case for innocence is hardly endorsed by others, read Trump, who staunchly defend the man while accused of sexual crimes themselves. Trump even bragged about it on tape. Amazingly, that did nothing to stop the satire of his presidential run, and may have even propelled his ascent. Even Melania dismissed his loathsome, lecherous, lecture as “locker room talk.” It was nothing of the kind.
What it was, in fact, was a repugnant insight into a personality type that unequivocally threatens the very fabric of America. The lunatics and sex offenders seek to run the asylum. Roy Moore and a host of god fearing, family valued, scions of the Grand Old Party have amply demonstrated the psychology of republicanised power that perhaps, with respect, Dr Blasey might seek to incorporate into her studies. Conservatism seeks to fundamentally monopolise decency while embracing hypocrisy, and, somehow, the paradox manages to perpetuate. It has everything to do with the entitlement of certain types of human behaviour. But this typology has no place in democracy; it has no place in the Supreme Court. I’m tired of these decrepit characters who pollute my world.
I believe Dr Blasey, not out of politics, but out of humanity.
4
The women who instinctively believe every single sexual assault allegation, no matter how incredible and unsupported by evidence, are just as bad as the men who instinctively dismiss every single sexual assault allegation, no matter how credible and supported by evidence.
8
@Jon W. It’s one thing to believe and another thing entirely to prove. The societally accepted burden is that of proof, not belief. Whatworld would we live in if all were judged by the belief of others.
7
This lying judge should withdraw from his nomination, if has any self respect!
3
I believe the accuser, Christine Ford.
Period.
6
Rape is an act of violence, and usually against women. If the young Bret Kavanaugh had anger issues against women, what's to say that he has resolved those issues? Do we really want someone who perhaps harbors extreme resentment against women making decisions about a woman's body? What about equal pay for equal work? What about access to birth control and on and on? The FBI needs to investigate the allegations, then we need to have the hearing. This rushing through of the nomination is just another attempt by Trump to keep himself out of the trouble that will inevitably catch up with him.
5
@DisillusionedDem How can the FBI POSSIBLY investigate these allegations? There won't be any physical evidence and there won't be any way to prove or disprove them, which of course was the point. He's already been thoroughly vetted by the FBI numerous times in connection with his security clearances and his federal appellate judgeship. There's nothing there.
4
@Jon W.
There's plenty there. The 65 women who scurried to express their . . . whatever.
There are the classmates from Georgetown Prep who will remember Brett with great . . . whatever.
There are the Jesuits who were his teachers, the scholastics and the priests whom Mark wrote about in his book, God and Man at Georgetown Prep. He described their behavior, the gay culture at the school, the drinking by the boys, etc. The Jesuits are probably long gone from the Society and eager to reminisce.
When the FBI investigates a person, they talk to the friends, enemies, neighbors, schoolmates, doctors, dentists, etc., etc. All will be revealed.
You have to wonder what the rush is. It’s not like Kavanaugh is some brilliant legal mind. He’s just some Republican hack.
But then again his views on Exectuive power are accommodating to Trump and he be counted to be protect corporations and suppress the people of color that so frighten the Republican base.
The Supreme Court used to mean something. Now it’s just another institution that the GOP, as minority party, will use to impose its will on the majority.
9
I'm curious what makes her accusation so credible. That they went to high school together? Because that is the only thing that is indisputable.
7
@plowe70
They didn't go to school together. Brett didn't attempt to rape a classmate. (Prep was an all boys school then.) He assaulted a girl from another school, locked her in a room, threw her on the bed, jumped on her, put his big hand on her mouth and turned up the music to keep anyone from hearing her scream. Grinding against her while trying to rip her clothes off.
What saved her? Mark jumped on them, causing them to fall off the bed, giving her a chance to escape.
1
@plowe70
"That they went to high school together? Because that is the only thing that is indisputable."
They did not go high school together.
He attended Georgetown Prep.
She attended Holton-Arms.
3
Orrin Hatch has already said publicly that he doesn’t believe Prof. Ford, and that even if it were true it wouldn’t matter because Kavanaugh is a good guy. So obviously he should recuse himself from voting on Kavanaugh’s nomination since he is unwilling to re-examine his position based on hearing testimony. Or that matter of Kavanaugh lying under oath during the confirmation hearings for his appellate bench appointment.
9
@1954Stratocaster In that case, so should all the Democrats who announced they'd vote "no" before the hearings even took place.
2
I believe Dr. Ford is telling the truth. I believe she is explaining her side of what happened at that party, in as much detail as she can recall.
Some have written that this occurred over 30 years ago and so is not relevant. That’s just not true. Someone experiencing a traumatic event is likely to remember it in detail for a long time.
All that said, she will be heard, as will Kavanaugh, and he’ll proceed to get appointed to SCOTUS. One thing that time does damage is the ability of law enforcement to conduct a proper investigation.
But at least she will be heard, and some people are going to remember that. And people will pay attention to how the GOP handles this. (Not Tump. He is a pig in his own right and we all know that.).
I don’t envy her, but do admire her courage to at least make a point in what is a very important matter, the appointment of a SCOTUS justice. I just hope she fares better than Anita Hill did when she raised sexual harassment charges against Clarence Thomas.
8
The notion that she has "absolutely nothing to gain" is ignorant at best. Anita Hill is a hero to many. She has made a career of her claims.
And she could well have prevented a nominee from becoming a justice.
Which is this accuser's intent.
10
@KAM
Of course it's her intent.
If my rapist were up for the Supreme Court I'd try to keep him off, too.
3
Kavanaugh has lied about his judicial view of Roe v. Wade- he has written the Court can do whatever it chooses. Settled law is irrelevant. He has lied about his role in Bush's prisoner torture scheme and the Republicans have suppressed 10's of thousands of documents to provide cover for Kavanaugh. He had no credibility before this accusation of sexual abuse. Kavanaugh's denials of wrong doing ring hollow just like Trump and Kavanaugh himself. If he has a single shred of patriotism (he doesn't), Kavanaugh would step down. The shadow of lying hypocrisy hanging over him will never dissipate.
7
@jefflz
But what if his owner (the person who paid off his debts) doesn't allow him to step down?
1
I am pretty sure she will not come for testimony. Just watch.
4
A lot of commenters here seem to be bent on minimizing the incident that Blasey has reported. So let's do a little thought experiment.
Suppose a high percentage of men - say 1 in 10 - was a victim of a violent sexual attack as an adolescent, before they had had a chance to have a signficant amount of sexual experience. This attack was so traumatic to them and had such a huge impact on their developing sexuality that they were unable to have an erection for the next 20 years. They would have to undergo extensive, emotionally painful psychotherapy to have anything approximating a helathy sex life. And, of course, this would have a huge impact on their relatlionships, with many of them remaining single or having their marriages fall apart due to the strain this placed on them.
If this were happening to lots of men, it would be seen as a national crises.
Of course, this is an oversimplication for illustrative purposes. "Not having an erection for 20 years" is of course not exactly equivalent to the impact of violent sexual assault on young women - for one thing, the after effects of that can manifest on many levels, with sexuality being only one of them. But I chose it because I think it gives a rough approximation of the effect of this kind of trauma on a woman's life, in terms that perhaps men will find it eaiser to understand.
I speak of this as someone who was myself a survivor of sexual assault at a young age and who knows many women in the same situation.
7
Please excuse the typos in the post above.
Brett Kavanaugh’s senior-year high school yearbook contained captions and inscriptions such as “100 kegs or bust” and Cowardly musings such as “Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.” You don’t suppose that Kavanaugh and his “alcohol drenched” drinking bros, like Marc Judge, ever acted on these sentiments—do you?
16
@Steve Griffith. Please substantiate.
@TRWell, the yearbook was submitted by a classmate to an attorney, who displayed it in all its “glory” on CNN. The “alcohol drenched” quotation is by way of Marc Judge and his book “Wasted”. By the way, the “Cowardly” musing was one of Noel Coward’s.
P.S. Marc Judge was allegedly in the room when and where the alleged attempted rape by Brett Kavanaugh took place. Next.
Why is there no mention of a polygraph test that the FBI administered to Blasey Ford and that she passed? I realize that these tests are not foolproof, but they should not be taken as irrelevant either. The mere fact that she agreed to take a polygraph with an FBI agent means something in and of itself.
7
@Mark It’s hard to say if it means anything 35 years later. Everyone is welcome to have an opinion but that’s about all anyone who isn’t the accused, accuser, or possible witness has. We have a he said/ she said.
1
@Mark
It likely means they had politics and appearances on their minds. Surely, her attorney explained why they are not admissible.
If Mr. Kavanaugh is the man responsible for Ms. Ford's experiences, then it would be highly unlikely for Mr. Kavanaugh to be a one-time offender. I can't think of one high-profile man--either during or before the #metoo era--who has been publicly accused by one woman and no other women have come forth with similar accusations.
That's not to say that Ms. Ford is lying, just that it would be virtually unprecedented. If this alleged offense is an indication of the judge's character, there is almost no chance that it would be confined to a single event or instance.
But we have days to go before Monday, which is eons of time in the modern 24-hour news cycle.
10
Me Too movement is affecting only the liberals. Bill Clinton was in trouble for only one Monica Lewansky but Trump is untouched in spite of dozens of women. Senator Franken had to resign. So many big name TV personalities had to resign. But Clarence Thomas is still a judge in Supreme Court. Kavanaugh must be investigated by FBI before any vote of confirmation. Some delay is very little price for the truth for life time appointment in the highest court of the land. Do not forget that Merrick Garland could not get a day in congress and the court was with one less judge for months. Already, the people do not trust or have any respect for the Supreme Court. It has become something like Tea Party, a extreme right wing organization or a sub branch of GOP.
10
She will never show up. It's easy to make baseless claims from afar in order to derail an nominee whose philosophy you don't agree with--but to show up at a public hearing--and make false accusation in person, is quite another thing.
She won't show. The claims are false. Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
8
@Jesse The Conservative
It will be interesting to see the NYT's headlines if she doesn't. "She must be heard" will suddenly become something else.
5
You are right that the real "truth" can only be obtained through a thorough investigative process probably conducted by the FBI in updating their existing background report on Judge Kavanaugh. So far, President Trump has not ordered them to do so. It should be easy to determine through such an investigation: (1) if Brett Kavanaugh attended the party in question, (2) whether he was drunk, and, most importantly, (3) whether Mark Judge will, under oath, remember whether or not he assaulted Dr. Blasey. There is little to be gained without this updated background report for the Senate Judiciary Committee to get beyond the accusation and denial other than to engage in unnecessary, and potentially vicious attacks on the credibility of a woman who has already suffered a major trauma. We need a serious process that seeks the truth, not a sham trial attempting to portray Judge Kavanaugh as the victim of a "witch hunt." The #MeToo movement demands more of our elected officials and they, too, will be judged along with Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh.
4
A common story for so many women and the common denial of another perpetrator.
Women feeling shamed to keep quiet-- that "boys will be boys" and girls characterized as "it's your own fault"
Time for any and all women to come forward to change this culture of abuse
6
I have no doubt that the trauma Dr. Blasey has borne for decades is legitimate.
Profoundly dismaying is it's repackaging as a political weapon, deployed deliberately at the last possible moment, supporting the only stratagem left to sway the balance of the Supreme Court and the ideological direction of the country: the calendar. Delay the appointment until a new--perhaps different--Congress. It's transparent and should be contrary to values its perpetrators profess to hold.
Nearly as unsettling: the concept that each of us should be defined primarily by the worst thing we've ever done, particularly when that thing happened in our formative years. By this standard, might there be amongst the members of the NYT Editorial Board...
a drug addict?
a drunk driver?
an irresponsible parent?
a shoplifter?
a bully?
Is this really the world we want?
5
@WBC
It's about degree. The closest you come in this list to a parallel event is drunk driving. But even that isn't close. The difference is that most drunk drivers get behind a wheel and never anticipate hurting anyone.
If her story is true, sounds like Kavanaugh and his friend knew exactly what they were doing beforehand because they allegedly were doing it behind a locked bedroom door.
1
@WBC
You don't know that the attempted rape of Christine Blasey was the "worst thing" Brett has ever done.
@Sherrie
Agree. They seem to have had it scripted. Push her in the room. Lock the door. Turn up the music. Throw her on the bed. Jump on her. Muzzle her with one hand while trying to rip off her clothes with the other hand. Laugh at her terror.
My brother in law, a New York attorney, knew of Anita Hill's problems with Clarence Thomas long before his nomination to the Supreme Court. Shameful that she was disregarded and her life made difficult for years.
6
Couldn’t this entire matter be resolved with testimony from the witness, Mark Judge? Shouldn’t he at the very least be subpoenaed to testify next week?
I have no idea what if anything happened, but show some honestly. There is a large financial upside for her
8
This may not be the home run all of you are hoping for. There are a few details that Blasey recalls well, the rest is hazy. That's what happens in these cases, especially after 36 years. It's difficult to know what is the truth in this era of fake news, but it seems that the therapist's notes say 4 boys and no mention of Kavanaugh by name. She doesn't recall the house or the circumstances of how she got there.
The Republican cross will zoom in on those inconsistencies. I hear they will have a single questioner and my guess it will be a female lawyer from the committee. She will sound kind and sympathetic but nevertheless exacting.
It will go something like this:
Why do the notes say 4 boys? "She incorrectly wrote this down."
You say that Mike Judge was also there and you all had something to drink. Could you have confused the two men? "No, I'm certain." How are you certain? "I don't know, it was a long time ago." You have no one to help back you up? "No, I never told anyone."
Who was the owner of this house? "I don't know."
How did you get there? "I don't know."
There are many more probing questions that the lawyer will ask and it will start becoming clear that Blasey does not remember much from 36 years ago. Doubt will start to creep into everyone's minds. This is not to say something didn't happen, but this hearing will not provide the evidence to torpedo Kavanaugh's nomination and instead provide sufficient cover for it to proceed.
5
"Clarence Thomas remains on the court and the Republican side of the Judiciary Committee remains all male. "
"Remains" is misleading. Sandra Day O'Connell was the first, remember? She was on the court until long after Thomas joined.
3
By coming out into the open, the accuser, Dr. Blasey, is putting her and her family’s very life in jeopardy. Think of all the “Second Amendment” gun-toting Trump supporters at his rallies who would want to “lock her up” - or worse.
This courageous act alone makes her story eminently believable. Kavanaugh, OTOH, has been lying, obfuscating, dodging and weaving throughout the entire process.
This will not be a repeat of the Anita Hill fiasco, that put sexual harasser Clarence Thomas, unfit in every way, on the Supreme Court for life.
6
False reporting is VERY LOW somewhere between 5-9% whereas 63% of assaults are NOT reported. The notion that a powerful man accused is most likely a false accusation is just False. Women live in fear of assault, but men do no nor should they live in fear of false accusations.
https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_Fa...
7
@Alicia Peterson This could be a case of mistaken reporting. Her experience happened, she has attributed it to Mr. Kavanaugh, but was not him.
1
@Alicia Peterson We don’t judge people by percentages. We also don’t prosecute on percentages. Everyone should be judged based on the specifics of the events that pertain to them. Should we judge the people accused of theft, fraud, etc based on percentage of likelihood? If you stood accused of a crime, would you want to be judged based on stats rather than facts?
2
@Alicia Peterson
But but but. We also assume she is telling the truth until proven otherwise. I know it is hard to imagine that your beloved Kavanaugh could have done this but it seems much more likely to me that Kavanaugh is lying than this woman is lying...
2
You say: "The next steps are for the F.B.I. to interview Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Blasey, Mr. Judge and possibly others about the accusations under oath, and for the Senate Judiciary Committee to hear from all parties, however long it takes."
But, with reference to the Senate, you don't specify what the phrase "all parties" should encompass. We know how the Senate Judiciary Committee defines "all parties," but is clear that the Committee should hear not only from Kavanaugh and Blasey, but also from Mr. Judge, the family therapist and Blasey's husband, all under oath. And others should they come forward. That is the primary purpose of the Committee.
These later individuals are corroborting or non-corroborating witnesses from a time well before Kavanaugh was selected to be the next Justice of the Supreme Court. They weren't made-up on the spot for the purposes of derailing the current proceeding.
The Senate should hear all of the evidence, not just part of it, as well as the results of lie detector tests that the FBI should administer.
P.S. I might be willing to forgive a teenager for very drunken, degrading, abusive and criminal behavior, if he were to ask for forgiveness. I cannot forgive a drunken criminal who lies later in an attempt to burnish his character. To lie under these circumstances demonstrates a very troublesome lack of character and integrity. And criminality as well.
6
What people believe of this allegation is irrelevant. Believing something to be true doesn’t make it so. If Judge Kavanaugh’s friend corroborated the accusers story then the situation would be different. Right now all people have is a gut feeling one way or the other. As a society we typically hold the notion of innocence until proven guilty. The senate should judge Mr. Kavanaugh based on his capabilities and past rulings and not based on unproven allegations. The accuser may be right but we will probably never have enough information to judge.
5
I'm sure many of us, both men and women, can remember our drunken teenage stupidities. But how many of us can say that those events ended up in attempted rape?
When alcohol strips away all inhibitions, we learn more about ourselves. Some want to climb radio towers, some want to go skinny dipping, some feel brave enough to try drugs, some reveal an undying love never expressed.
And as we have learned lately from frat parties and such, some drunks attack women. Can we excuse the radio tower exploit and put these attacks in the same category? I think not.
8
They're going to take him down. Just in case there was any doubt in anyone's mind about who really runs this country.
3
“...Dr. Blasey, who initially asked Ms. Feinstein to keep her identity confidential, told The Washington Post that the alleged attack changed her life for years and contributed to long-term anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder...
To put a point of truth on it, her name wasn’t being kept committee-confidential...She apparently had been talking with WaPo for several weeks...
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/business/media/rolling-stone-retracts...
“...Ultimately, we were too deferential to our rape victim,” Mr. Woods, the article’s editor, said in the report. “We honored too many of her requests in our reporting. We should have been much tougher, and in not doing that, we maybe did her a disservice...
As Santayana once said...
“Those who cannot rewrite the past are condemned to be collateral damage in it”
...or some future revision
.....
Or not...
1
@W in the Middle
As I heard reported, Ms. Blasey Ford sent a confidential letter to Sen. Feinstein in July, and only when the news of it leaked did she contact the WaPo reporter. As she revealed, she had other reporters camping out at her home and at her workplace. With her identity out in the open, she decided it best to pick a reporter she could trust to get her story out correctly. Otherwise she would have been another victim of faux news.
3
Men are tone deaf. no woman would EVER put herself out there if this never happened. She needs to be heard. She took a lie detector test. let's make Kavanaugh and Judge take one. 45 needs to take one too for all of his accusers.
6
@Rose UVA Mattress Girl, Duke Lacross, 2015 Rolling Stone Article... just to name a couple.
A lot of commenters here seem to be bent on minimizing the incident that Blasey has reported. So let's do a little thought experiment.
Suppose a high percentage of men - say 1 in 10 - was a victim of a violent sexual attack as an adolescent, before they had had a chance to have a signficant amount of sexual experience. This attack was so traumatic to them and had such a huge impact on their developing sexuality that they were unable to have an erection for the next 20 years. They would have to undergo extensive, emotionally painful psychotherapy to have anything approximating a helathy sex life. And, of course, this would have a huge impact on their relatlionships, with many of them remaining single or having their marriages fall apart due to the strain this placed on them.
If this were happening to lots of men, it would be seen as a national crises.
Of course, this is an oversimplication for illustrative purposes. "Not having an erection for 20 years" is of course not exactly equivalent to the impact of violent sexual assault on young women - for one thing, the after effects of that can manifest on many levels, with sexuality being only one of them. But I chose it because I think it gives a rough approximation of the effect of this kind of trauma on a woman's life, in terms that perhaps men will find it eaiser to understand.
I speak of this as someone who was myself a survivor of sexual assault at a young age and who knows many women in the same situation.
4
Since so many "believe" Kavanaugh's accuser, it's safe to say the hearing is irrelevant. Closed minds don't really attend hearings.
8
If Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump, and the Republican Party had any honor or ethics this nomination would already have been withdrawn. If fact, Kavanaugh would never have been nominated in the first place. He is both a liar and quite possibly a sexual abuser. The week is not over yet--other accusations may come to light. And, if they do, what then?
2
I hope that the process works in this case, unlike it did for Anita Hill. I still feel sick to my stomach when I think about how Anita Hill was treated -- sitting before all of those men having to recall all of the disgusting things Judge Thomas subjected her to. In that case, it ended up saddling us with a supreme court justice who, for many of us, cannot be trusted. I fear it will happen again. We have a president who has been accused multiple times of sexual harassment and he was caught on tape admitting he abused women! Meanwhile Billy Bush was fired from the Today Show for his part in that event. Can't be on morning TV but hey you can be elected president! Sickening.
2
This sexual assault appears to have actually happened. Sure, Kavanaugh was a drunk kid. But that's now beside the point. Isn't he still under oath? And he has denied it. So he lied under oath. Next candidate please.
4
@Bob in NM Your belief in who is or isn’t telling the truth is not much of a standard. Without proof or corroboration from a witness it hardly seems appropriate to hold someone accountable for a he said, she said incident 35 years ago. If there were multiple accusers or more proof then I may see your point. Right now there really isn’t enough evidence.
4
Please address the quote from Mark Judge, in his Georgetown Prep yearbook, approved by the institution, that “ Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.”These leaders in training, like Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh were formed and mentored in such a blatantly misogynistic environment, and ,as such, are not fit for the Supreme Court.
4
You blithely state here is no upside for women to come forward. Yet somehow you neglect the impact on the accused. A single unprovable accusation against someone with a heretofore clean record can be tarred for life. A little fairness is in order.
3
What possible reason would Ms. Rosen have to do anything but tell the truth as she remembers it? She is not part of some nefarious plot by Democrats to bring down Kavanaugh. She is not doing this for money, fame, or anything else. Something terrible happened to her as a teenager. In plain terms, she was sexually assaulted. She deserves to be heard, as does Kavanaugh. Let’s not have Clarence Thomas redux.
3
@Mark Siegel
Who is "Ms. Rosen?"
A new low for the Senate.
1
We now see that Repub controlled Senate doesn't even want to risk possible collaboration w/ Ms. Ford's testimony in front of its chambers- only Kavanaugh & Ford will be allowed to make statements. Ford stated that she and her husband sought counseling for the trauma over the episode YEARS ago- before Kavanough was subject to SCOTUS appointment.
So why not allow these other witnesses to be heard.?- Kavanough can call witnesses as well. We know the outcome if it is just those two- Her word against his. It is unbelievable the level of hypocrisy that McConnell is operating under for the sake to ramming this confirmation through. We go on about Trump's fascist tendencies, but this Congress is no better. Susan Collins- are you really going to sit back and just let this happen?
2
With 36 years of living an ethical law abiding life, what difference does it make if a minor teenage boy got drunk and acted out sexually without actually raping anyone?
Playing Gotcha! Has become a national pastime in America.
I'm glad I'm an expatriate!
4
@michael kittle
You don't know that he has lived "an ethical law abiding life." Absurd to pretend to know that. His financial situation, e.g., makes it obvious that something was amiss. How could a partner in a big DC law firm be broke, own nothing, be in debt?
Etc.
4
@michael kittle
We're glad too!
1
Let us also recall the rabid moralizing and impeachment efforts on the Republican side (with Kavanaugh’s assistance to Ken Starr) when Bill Clinton lied about a consensual sex act. Now we have Kavanaugh lying about a non-consensual sex act (with the aid of his buddy Mark Judge, which makes it attempted gang rape) who would get a lifetime appointment. But we are all used to the hypocrisy ( as it is continually thrust upon us without our consent)
I believe the victim. Why would she rope in a witness and co-conspirator to this crime who would undoubtably deny her accusations? Why wouldn’t she, if she were lying, say Kavanaugh acted alone?
5
Let's discuss this after Grassley insists that Kavanaugh take a polygraph.
4
A couple of points on Mr. Kavanaugh, he might still have a drinking problem if his BFF Judge had one. Secondly he has a lot of debt for Baseball Season Tickets and playoff tickets, though he was a Basketbal fan.
Also he has two daughters, hopefully a drunk punk does not attack them at some high school party in the future and who bought the alcohol at the party, the mother Mrs. Kavanaugh who is also a judge not to be confuse with his BFF Judge. We don't need another Clarence Thomas who does not talk or has an opinion about nothing.
1
It's deja vu all over again. I wish I could stop myself from watching any of it.
America is going to hear another victim of sexual misconduct poor her heart out to no avail while a bunch of stuffy white old men ask questions like, "Are you a scorned woman?"
He is going to be confirmed. These people don't care, or they wouldn't enable Trump.
1
So here's what happens: Kavanaugh gets confirmed, reverses Roe vs Wade, and writes the majority opinion legalizing lie detectors as admissible evidence.
2
I mean I get it. This is a political move by Democrats who have no power trying to slow down the nomination process.
I just can't past how cravenly Machiavellian this all is. Sure we should believe her and hopefully someone else will come along to add to this 3 decade year old accusation that evidently didnt matter enough for this woman to talk about in therapy until 6 years ago. Sure we should probably now find someone else to nominate and send this guy to the dustbin of history, or evidently back to being part of the second highest courts in the land.
However, it's just getting to be too much. Craven politics had turned me off so hard. I wish there was a third party that I could vote for that didnt need to dig up 30 year old accusers to achieve power.
Also this makes me feel like the #metoo movement might become a political tool to bludgeon opponents with. Im sure 60% of us have a bad high school sex experience, and if the bar is that you have to be without sin things could become a chaos of sexual assault allegations against everyone. And dont think this will only affect the white men that liberals are fine with being scapegoated. Black men aren't sinless super gentlemen either.
3
@Jacqueline
When something isn't talked about in therapy for decades, and then IS talked about, it's not because it didn't matter. It's the opposite.
2
Correction: Anita F Hill, not Anita F Gray.
Why are we hearing nothing from this paper about the sexual assault from Democratic candidate Keith Ellison in Minnesota? Or the sexual harassment of Democratic candidate Gil Cisneros in California? Is this yet another case, like Bill Clinton, where women should be believed if they are accusing GOP but ignored and marginalized if they are accusing Democrats?
4
Surely, there must, somewhere, be a Republican who hasn't had unexplained debts, unexplained debt cancellation received, allegations of sexual misconduct, and a history of lies. Find that Republican and submit a new name for U.S. Supreme Court.
4
Did Mark Judge use Bart O'Kavanaugh's name in his book "Wasted" because Bart was Bret Maverick's brother?
2
And yet another moment where someone other than our perverted sitting president gets challenged for sexual allegations.
2
It was the men who believed Clarence Thomas not the women.
4
Dr. Ford is most likely telling the truth. Unless she is being paid or bribed, why else would she put herself in this awful, embarassing spotlight? She's obviously not stupid. She knew what the consequences would be.
All of a sudden, this man's credit card problems seem more troubling. Bad judgement?
5
There are hundreds of thousands of people all over the United States who were charged with crimes as teenagers and carry those convictions with them throughout their lives, so the answer is yes, you can be held accountable your whole life for what you did as a child. And if what you did was attempted rape, then you lied about it under oath, at the very least, you are not fit to serve a lifetime as a Supreme Court Justice.
6
I'm with her.
3
Very great pain today as we are about to witness the Senate Judiciary hearing on Monday, with a female assaulted by President Trump's choice for SCOTUS, Brett Kavanaugh in high school 30 years ago, and his accuser. We witnessed on live TV, before the Internet assaulted America's consciousness, the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings, colossal miscarriage of the Senate's Advise and Consent confirmation to SCOTUS in 1991.
Ms. Hill was a professor of law in Oklahoma before she took a job at E.E.O.C. and was sexually harrassed by her boss, Mr. Thomas. 27 years have passed since the sexual misconduct allegations of Thomas by his co-worker, Anita Hill, were denied by the Senate's granting of Clarence Thomas a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.
Confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh for a seat on the Supreme Bench will guarantee the ultra conservative right perhaps 30 or more years of rolling back decisions of the past decades that have changed women's lives in the present. Justice Thomas has remained mainly mute on the court for 27 years. During these #MeToo times, women are beginning to sit at the head of the table as feminism has truly come to America.
None of us who witnessed Clarence Thomas and valiant lawyer, Anita Hill, had ever heard of hashtags, iPhones or Google, but today our lives are consumed with high tech and the most reviled presidency in American history. America can't afford Trump's pick, Judge Kavanaugh, on the Supreme Bench.
2
#BrettToo. Really?
How about:
#IBelieveBrett
And
#LiberalSmearCampaign
2
She passed a lie detector test. He's comfortable lying under oath.
4
For all those demanding a Kavanaugh take a lie detector test, you should understand a few things:
1) Lie detectors are about as scientific as phrenology
2) Lie detectors do not detect lies, they measure blood pressure, heart rate, skin conductivity
3) The assumption is that if someone is lying there will be changes in these measures -- that is unproven
4) Most scientists believe the polygraph is pseudoscience.
5) Psychopaths, people who believe they are telling the truth but are not, or who understand how the polygraph works can easily pass even though they aren't telling the truth.
6) They aren't allowed as evidence in court.
4
@Ralphie
Why does the FBI use them?
2
@Ralphie
Which begs the question why a lie detector test was even taken? Surely her attorney must have advised her of these problems with its admissibility.
Either it was a political stunt (so people would believe her despite her lack of details) or it was meant as a substitute for her testimony, which might never be forthcoming.
1
@Pecan - because they are idiots? They don't use them for criminal cases -- they use them for security clearances etc., not court cases. And it is very difficult to verify whether someone who passes didn't lie or whether someone who didn't pass didn't lie either. I.E. -- not really falsifiable.
Of course, an intimidating FBI agent vs a naive individual who believes that polygraphs work may fess up to things they've done -- yes I smoked a joint -- but that's about it. Lie detectors do not detect lies.
Give the good judge a lie detector test.
2
Dr. Blakey took a lie detector test. Will Brett Kavanaugh?
1
Well, Kavanaugh wanted his daughters to see democracy in action. Let's hope they do.
2
Will you please stop calling her "the accuser?" In the front page headline, other articles, in Kavanaugh's retort, in your editorials... she is "the accuser."
Emile Zola is the accuser. This woman's name is Christine Blasey Ford. She prefers to be called Blasey.
And it sounds like she's the one telling the truth.
1
Her name is Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
2
I'm still waiting for Trump to sue all of his sexual assault accusers.
1
@wilsoncAnd release his tax returns. That’s been one long and thorough audit.
1
Timining is everything.
1
*ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/18/former-sex-crimes-prosecutor-analyzed-fords-allegations-against-kavanaugh-heres-her-take
This just gets better and better...
“...Fairstein said sexual assault rarely happens with witnesses present. Yet Ford puts two people in the room — Kavanaugh...and...Mark Judge, whom she called “an essential witness....”
“...To me, it’s compelling that [Ford] puts someone else there, and that the person who happens to be in the room has a blackout drinking problem," said Fairstein. Judge...described himself similarly in his book...“That’s sort of the intoxicated behavior she described that night...
“...Ford mentioned details — like the pool party, the narrow staircase...There are enough facts for someone to remember it was their party and their house,” said Fairstein.
“...Wigdor echoed Fairstein, saying: “She put a third person in the room. If you were making something up, why would you do that...
*ttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/business/media/rape-uva-rolling-stone-frat.html
“...My eyes were adjusting to the dark…I heard voices and I started to scream and someone pummeled into me and told me to shut up. And that’s when...this other boy, who was throwing his weight on top of me. Then one of them grabbed my shoulders…One of them put his hand over my mouth and I bit him – and he...punched me in the face. … One...said, ‘Grab its...leg.’ As soon as they said it, I knew they were going to rape me...
2
Supreme Court judges should give us all confidence that they are fully capable of interpreting and upholding the Constitution and laws, that they are impartial arbiters, and that they are worthy of the position/task. Kavanaugh is none of these.
He should withdraw his nomination for the good of the court and the nation.
6
What's hard to understand is why the lie detector test? Surely her politically connected attorney advised her of its unreliability and, hence, uselessness. One can easily conclude it was a political stunt.
4
Sadly this event resonates deeply and with more than desired truth; as I was that young girl forced by my "boyfriend" to prove i loved him. Unfortunately it was with him pinning me down in the backseat at a drive in and resulted in pregnancy. I kept both the facts secret; finally revealing the pregnancy when it was too late to conceal. Yet I told no one of the rape until a few years ago finally realizing I no longer cared who knew or believed me. What i did care about was saying the words, allowing how it felt to be real, and freeing myself of a secret that wasn't a scarlet A... It was not a boys will be boys it was a boy wanting what he wanted and was taking it along with opportunities that would never be mine. I do not forgive him but i forgive mysel for the names people in the late 50s called me. BE HEARD Dr. Ford. I will be cheering your liberation.
138
@nettie
Netttie, your words tell the truth of what many women experienced. Thank you for so bravely telling this. I wish the New York Times would choose your letter as a "Times Pick." More people need to read it--especially men.
@chichimax thank you so much for your understanding and validation. The Times did make it a PICK. YES
Sorry, the eighties weren’t that long ago.
Who else was at the party that night and can they place Kavanagh, his buddy, and Blakley at the party?
Who had this notorious party?
Who were Brett’s friends at the time, the prep school boys surely knew each other and may still be in contact.
Did anyone see them go into the room or her run out of the room?
Let the FBI investigation begin, there’s too much credibility in the story.
1
@Greg Nowell
The FBI's job is merely to collect information and present it to the committee. It has already included her allegations and present the file to the committee.
Anyone who doesn't understand the FBI's role in this shouldn't be on that committee.
We cannot have a man who is willing to lie under oath on the Supreme Court.
"Caesar's wife must be above suspicion."
3
My friend Minerva writes: “Isn't it ironic that someone who may have tried to rape someone could become a Supreme Court Justice who would make a woman bear the offspring of her rapist?”
8
Judge Kavanaugh was part of Ken Starr team investigating Bill Clinton affairs with Monica Lewinski.
2
I am not weighing in on the veracity, or lack thereof, of her claim. But I do want to correct a major disqualifying flaw in your argument that “..,there is no upside for women who come forward with stories of sexual harassment or assault, especially when the accused is a famous or powerful man.” You either are being incredibly naive or deliberately trying to deceive”.
Well before this most recent issue arose, the Democrats have been hellbent on blocking Kavanaugh’s appointment. NOT because of any objective criticism of his expertise, which is beyond reproach, but solely because of his ideology. Candidly, that venomous desire to block him has no bounds for many Democrats and liberals around the country.
Unfortunately for them, until this past week they had completely failed in their efforts. Suddenly, there is a lone woman appearing from nowhere who at this 11th hour has the potential power to do what 49 Democratic Senators have been powerless to do, to take down Kavanaugh.
Again, I am not claiming that her tale is false or less than totally accurate. I am simply pointing out that there likely are many thousands of rabid anti-Kavanaugh woman who would have been willingly to (falsely) make an allegation like this if it would have the effect of taking him down. They simply were not in a position to credibly claim to have crossed baths with him.
So drop your ridiculous assertion that ““..,there is no upside for women who come forward with stories...” There is HUGE upside!
3
It's way past due for Orin Hatch to be relieved of his duties. His comments today were so extraordinarily out of touch. Apparently he has learned nothing in the last 27 years. Basically the same goes for all the rest of the GOP, all male, white members of the judiciary committee. If you put Kavanaugh on the bench you will further galvanize all the women of this country against you. We are watching, we are angry and we are voting. Enough is enough. We have a serial abuser in the White House and one on the court already. Stop already.
6
What is going on?
Well, first there was Judge Robert Bork, then there was Judge Clarence Thomas, now there is Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
The lesson is clear. Democrats will sink as low as they can to try to destroy any Supreme Court nominee who seems to threaten their political agenda.
At the next nomination, they will want to know all about the entire sex life of the nominee. Nothing will be off limits, even what the nominee did at age 6.
But Democrats will still always love Bill Clinton, and his enabler.
4
This incident reminds me of something Ruth Bader Ginsburg says, in the documentary RBG: “All we ask is that our brethren take their feet off our necks.”
Since virtually everything Brett Kavanaugh has said or done is in the spirit of keeping his and other men’s feet on the necks of women, rulings and expressions on abortion and Roe v. Wade chief among them, his alleged behavior, with disrespect to Dr. Blasey when he was seventeen, is hardly inconsistent with his judicial posture.
Think also of the man who nominated him to the Supreme Court, someone whose stock and trade, over decades, is everything from abuse and sexual harassment to outright sexual assault of women. It only makes sense that for this position, he would select someone in his own odious mold.
Notice, as well, that in his non-denial, denial, Kavanaugh says that he wasn’t guilty of any “wrongdoing”. This sounds very much like a variation on “When you’re a star, they let you do it, let you grab them by the...”
Moreover, why give the benefit of the doubt to someone who claims not to remember—of course, he doesn’t, he was “stumbling drunk”—and not to Dr. Blasey, who recalls the episode in excruciating detail, has had it verified by, among others, her therapist and a lie-detector test, and has absolutely nothing to gain by going public with it. In fact, in terms of personal attacks and humiliation, quite the opposite. Is it any wonder so few women in similar situations stick their necks out?
4
My concern is that both Kavanaugh and Page were drunk enough that their brains were checked out so that indeed they do not remember.
3
Subject: Brett Kavanaugh bullied a legally blind student at Mater Dei School, I was Brett Kavanaugh’s 8th Grade Teacher at Mater Dei School in Bethesda, MD, 1978.
* Brett Kavanaugh: Bullied Disabled Student in Private Junior High School, Bethesda, Maryland: I am most compelled to write you about my experiences as Brett Kavanaugh’s Teacher English and Religion 7th and 8th Grade teacher at Mater Dei School.
This is a great school, yet Brett Kavanaugh was one of those problem students whom we had to hold for a number of detention sessions for bullying a disabled and legally blind student in his class, Jonathan L., who sat two seats ahead of him in the first row. Nothing is more disruptive to a legally blind boy / person than what Brett Kavanaugh did to this boy...he sadistically bullied him and tortured him by continually hitting him with a wooden ruler with a sharp metal band. I know this student was completely terrorized.
Brett was caught and had to do 2-3 days of after school detention for terrorizing and bullying a fellow student. This was bad behavior to fellow students. Brett felt no remorse for his terrible behaviors and actions. I believe that Brett Kavanaugh as a bully in 1978 remains true to his character now as it did several months later with Ms Ford at the local girls’s school.I don’t expect he’s changed much, other than putting on a temporary show to win confirmation.
8
@G.M Stanton this is a defining moment in Kavanaugh’s life and should be known by everyone.
1
My thoughts go to the thousands of Black men in jail, who as minors committed some crime, leading to life sentences. This guy got away with it until now. He should not be rewarded for his good fortune with a seat at the highest court in the land. That doesn't look like equal justice.
3
She took a lie detector test. Make both guys do the same. And make the results public.
3
More distraction. OK, a high school honor student, privileged, elite, arrogant, gets drunk, makes a horrible mistake, and gets away with it because the 15 years old is too scared to tell anybody. He is now up for lifetime appointment to the "highest court in the land" already sullied, albeit different reason, by the presence of Clarence Thomas and the "ghost" of Merrick Garland."
Would it not be the honorable, honest, and right thing to do for him to admit it and say "yeh, I made a horrible mistake when I was 17 years old, I am deeply sorry, and I thereby withdraw my name from consideration. I will go back to my job as a judge." But no, they (GOP politicians, the president, FOX news, insert any appropriate liar) thrive on distraction. Distraction and denial. The thing is, the potential confirmation of this judge is already so tainted and corrupt (see numerous examples of perjury and withholding of critical documents, not to mention the fact that he's been appointed by an illegitimate president who himself should be indicted for multiple felonies), that this is one more thing that further distracts us from the more serious problem of our broken democracy.
4
One one social website thread they questioned what Christine Blasey Ford was doing as a 15 year old doing at a “drinking party”. At. 17 years of age, Brett Kavanaugh would have also been an underaged minor, so this accusation is a double standard without mentioning him.
Somewhere she stated that she sought medical attention for this. While there are privacy protections for medical records, she might seek to obtain those records to corroborate her claim, though given the time, they might not be available
Yes things are different from the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill case which in my opinion then and now was a huge miscarriage of justice in the way Anita Hill was treated. Christine Blasey Ford deserves a fair hearing. It is sad to have an expectation as a woman who reports a sexual violation be it rape or harassment, that it is guaranteed her life will be worse off for it. I am sure she was not seeking financial retribution as it appears that Kavanaugh has not managed his finances well anyway.
Our Pervert-in-Chief who represents himself as our president complains of why this information was held for so long. The accuser did not want to go public with this information and requested this. It was not forwarded to Senator Feinstein until June or July of this year, and when it got leaked to the press, Dr. Ford went public in an effort to control her narrative since many of rumors were false.
3
Kavanaugh should take a lie detector test. His testimony otherwise is nothing more than cheap talk. Should he refuse to take the test, he should not be confirmed. Period.
Kavanaugh and the Trumpublicans on the Senate Judiciary committee are one more reason to
VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS
3
It used to be teenage indiscretions were accepted as that. President Obama smoking pot with his friends was certainly illegal and his essay plagiarism was not an honest act. However since he was not an adult they were not considered as 'disqualifying' him from the Presidency.
3
@Donna Gray Once again, there is a big difference between smoking pot and attempted rape.
3
Trump said that he would appoint judges who would revoke Roe v. Wade. Kavanaugh says Roe v. Wade is settled law. Who is lying?
3
Mark Judge, the other attempted rapist in the room, says he never saw Brett Kavanaugh act that way. Well sure he did - he literally wrote a book about it. It's called "Wasted".
Brett Kavanaugh could not be any less proper for our time.
3
Here are a few questions. Should a teenager who ran a red light and killed someone be disqualified from being a Supreme Court justice? Should a teenager who shoplifted be disqualified from being a Supreme Court justice? Should a teenager who cheated on an exam be disqualified from being a Supreme Court justice? Does a teenager’s behavior determine that teenager’s adult behavior? Should we maintain a registry of teenagers’ misbehavior so that certain types of employment will be denied to them?
1
@John Bardgette
None of these are remotely comparable to attempted rape. I think most people know that. That fact that some do not seem to demonstrates how far we have to go as a society.
2
@John Bardgette
If the teenager attempted rape, then "Yes" that teenager should be disqualified from sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court.
(P.S.- Kavanaugh also committed perjury in his Senate testimony- so "yes" to that being disqualifying too).
3
If Kavanaugh were accused of attempted murder at 17, and if his accuser came forward and agreed to testify, I don't think there would be much question from anyone about whether it was important to address the matter before deciding whether to grant him an appointment to the Supreme Court or any court. Attempted rape is supposedly less serious. I, however, believe that if we are to have a death penalty, then it should apply in appropriate cases of sexual assault. I think the resistance to taking sexual assault and sexual harassment seriously comes mostly from defensive men who have perpetrated these offenses and who fear being held accountable for them. In other words, it's not really about Kavanaugh. It's that if he can be taken down, so can they.
3
If someone has never been sexually assaulted, or doesn't live with someone or know someone who's been assaulted, they have very little experience on which to base an opinion.
If people are dogmatically in favor of Kavanaugh, based on nothing but Party affiliation, they are the lowest of the low. Indeed, they are following the steps of a Party that reaches new lows almost daily.
There is, however, another group who would favor Kavanaugh. And it is those who have done exactly the same and feel no remorse for having wrecked someone's life. Most traumatic events tend to return in later life to haunt people. And if you haven't experienced that either, you're very fortunate.
I've been close to two women (that I know of) who were sexually assaulted at a young age. If I ever ran into either of the men who did it, and knew without a doubt it was them, they'd have a really bad day to remember for the rest of their lives, too.
But it's not just women. We have just seen evidence of the Catholic church's endemic, systematic assaults. Should all those cases be forgotten because it was so long ago?
A few of my school teachers can be thankful they died a long time ago. I'd have great pleasure meeting them in a dark alley -- one a time or all together, would make no difference -- for what they tried to do 12-year-old boys in the '60s.
You simply don't forget such things. Bringing them up, when you've buried such thoughts, is hard, and deserves the respect of being listened to.
2
The hearings will be a sham as far as Republicans are concerned. Senator Orrin Hatch has already concluded that Christine Blasey Ford is "mixed up," without offering any basis for his opinion. I'm afraid the political hacks will prevail.
2
Well, yes. Yes, of course Kavanaugh should do the honorable thing and withdraw. But not necessarily because of this accusation. He should withdraw because voters deserve to have a chance to “weigh in” during the next election. At least, that’s what my Republican Senator, Rob Portman, says.
Oh. Wait. Magically that no longer applies. The American people should only have a chance to “weigh in” if it means an eight-month vacancy on the Court and keeping a democratically-elected President from nominating a candidate. Fifty-something days until an election apparently does not count. Contacting his office asking him to explain such blatant hypocrisy resulted in a form letter telling me how “well-qualified” Kavanaugh is. Never mind that his qualifications or the lack of them had nothing to do with my question.
Given Republican precedent set during the Merrick Garland fiasco, Kavanaugh should never have made it far enough to have an opportunity to mansplain his behavior. We should be waiting for the American people to “weigh in” on the Senators who will advise and consent (or not) before any nominations were made.
5
The third possibility, that most people are discounting, is that neither is lying.
Memories, at best, are usually faulty. How many times in our lives are we utterly convinced we heard or saw something but turned out to be wrong? Dr. Ford believing something happened means she's honest but it doesn't mean she's right. 35 years (or 20 years) is a long time to rely on memories. Prof Ford has already said that she doesn't remember many details of the party. I'm sure that's true. Was she also drinking? I have no doubt that what she says is true BUT it may not be the person who she honestly thinks it is.
This whole situation disturbs me because if something that allegedly happened 35 years ago can be used to destroy someone without even a shred of evidence then I'm afraid we're all doomed. There's a reason we have a statue of limitations, memories and evidence fade. It then becomes impossible to prove a negative. How exactly does Judge Kavanaugh prove he didn't do it? Assuming both sides are completely convincing in their testimony, does that mean one is right and the is wrong? I'm sorry but I require proof that something happened. That proof can be evidence or other testimony. I also hope that Judge Kavanaugh will be provided with what she asserts happened. When, where, etc that can, at least, open the possibility that he can prove, albeit 35 years later, that he wasn't there.
6
So let’s try to understand this : we now will be crucified for anything we do as a minor. He was 17!, honestly the hypocrisy knows no bounds for the left
7
@Bill Lombard
Honestly Bill, did you, at seventeen, try to rape a fifteen year old girl while drunk?
Hypocrisy knows no bounds in any direction.
1
Ms. Ford took and passed a lie detector test. Shouldn't Mr. Kavanaugh be required to do the same ?
2
The sexually explicit questions that Brett Kavanaugh prepared and shared for the Clinton enquiry did not come from the mind of a choirboy.
There’s something about this man that leaves one feeling uneasy.
SCOTUS deserves better.
The women of America definitely deserve better.
3
But will it matter so many years after we believed Anita Hill?
1
Please refer to Dr. Ford by her name. Continuing to use "Kavanaugh's Accuser" dehumanizes her and perpetuates stereotypes that women are hysterical or manipulative. Your headlines make it sounds as if Dr. Ford is doing something to him by speaking out. Please put them on equal footing by using both of their names.
2
Re: your headline, have you read Anita Hill’s piece on your op-ed page this morning? Since Dr. Ford has a name, let’s try using that instead of making her nameless, and Kavanaugh powerful, which is what your headline does.
2
#MeTooHollywood is not about Harvey Weinstein alone; nor is We Are Not Surprised about one or another case of harassment in the Art World. Likewise, #BrettToo is not merely a he said/she said dustup as the Republicans in the Senate and White House would like to frame it; it’s about the culture that enables a privileged right-wing Christian male clique to impose their views of reality and social values in the courts and in Government, and of course in their private lives.
Many years ago, I sat in the jury box as the assistant district attorney wound up her case. Coming to a particularly egregious form of discrimination that would have exonerated the accused, the ADA intoned, “Not worthy of belief, ladies and gentlemen.” Our collective jaws dropped. Whatever the legal verdict on Monday, I am pretty confident what the verdict of We the People will be: “Guilty as charged, Donald Trump, Chuck Grassley, Ted Cruz…”
1
Senator Orin Hatch who once verbally abused Anita Hill will now get to reprise his role as GOP "avenger" on Christine Blasey Ford.
He must be thrilled.
2
#MeToo is a movement that refers to victims speaking out about the trauma they have gone through. By titling your piece as "#BrettToo?" you evidently, at least on some level, consider Judge Kavanaugh to be the potential victim here. Good for you.
2
Not sure I understand your comments around Trump and "deny, deny, deny". While he is standing by his nominee, the quote I saw was; "We need to go through the process" (of the hearing next week). Doesn't sound like a denial to me. I am not a Trump fan, just trying to be unbiased.
2
@JDG
I sense the media would like nothing better than to keep the focus on Trump. It could then refrain from having to actually investigate Kavanaugh's accuser, including her views on Trump and lawyer's political involvement. Soros' money might actually get a look too.
2
He should be asked if he’s willing to take a lie detector tes, like she did. If he is not, we’ll know who to believe.
2
My question to Brett would be "how would respond if this was your daughter?" "...your wife?"
1
Some contend that timing is everything. Judge Brett Kavanaugh must acutely comprehend the power of this adage. Certainly his accuser Christine Blasey Ford also has some sense of the importance of timing, and so too Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Kavanaugh’s elevation to the nomination by the President to the Supreme Court can hardly be discounted as a key motivator for the presentation of an accusation of sexual assault that took place some thirty years ago.
It would seem that Judge Kavanaugh’s elevation to and tenure on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals would have been similar cause for the surfacing of these allegations almost 20 yeas ago, or at some intervening point as he served on one of the most influential federal courts in the land.
It is impossible to not to question the degree and variety of purely political motivation and intent in this sequence of events.
It does seem that the Judiciary Committee has already faltered gravely in vetting this candidate absent the full consideration of the Ford allegation. Can they be trusted in the second iteration?
1
If anyone thinks that Kavanaugh's alleged assault is too far in the past to discuss, remember that teenagers who are poor or black have spend years or decades in prison for less serious crimes. Getting away with it over 30 years ago doesn't make it off limits when a lifetime appointment is in play.
4
@RN
One must assume that they can at least provide a date and location of the newly uncovered evidence.
4
So we can assume that there will be condemnation of Mr. Ellison soon from the Democrat party, remember Karen Monahan, a former girlfriend of Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison,who accused him of domestic abuse?He denied the accusations, but, she provided medical records from 2017, stating on two different Dr. Visits, "I told them about the abuse and who did it. My therapist released records stating I have been dealing and healing from the abuse. Four people, including my supervisor at the time, stated that I came to them after and shared the exact story I shared publicly, I shared multiple text between me and Keith, where I discuss the abuse with him and much more." But NOT to be believed, but after 35 years and can't remember much Ford is?
4
Look, unfortunately these things have happened before. Kids get drunk, a poor girl gets molested, but Kavanaugh you have the opportunity to set this right. I believe you are guilty and I believe you should just say no to becoming a Supreme Court Justice.
Can any man who is guilty of such horrible act be honest for once and for all?
4
How will we know when a women of poor character or nefarious intent makes a bald face lie against a man of good character? Why do we allow this guilty until proven innocent movement (MeToo) to grow?
2
I believe Anita Hill now more than ever, and I believe Dr. Ford.
5
I would prefer to hear from the 65 women on the letter of recommendation that was pulled together in a couple of days
2
@Deirdre
Try FoxNews.
1
There is no doubt this story is true.
But he was drunk and young. Some could say he is different now and that is certainly true also.
But he just denied it.
For a future Justice, it's a deal breaker.
And by the way, while we are talking about sexual misconduct/harassement, Justice Thomas should be impeached.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/the-case-for-impeaching-cla...
3
It will likely be impossible to completely disprove a nonspecific date / place / time claim with the challenges of 36 year old memories. I am glad we now live in a time where we seek evidence and don't just sweep things under a rug (Chappaquiddick). However, lets remember our values need to bend towards truth and integrity and not political motivations.
2
Is this crazytown? One woman's allegation from 30 years ago is going to keep Kavanaugh from being nominated? He's a Christian and a family man. All of his views are in line with this. Is this only ploy the left has left to stop conservatives from taking their rightful places? Shameful.
4
Not to minimize a woman’s pain, but according to the Washington Post, Dr. Ford reached out to the newspaper’s anonymous tip line back in July and continued to talk to a reporter through the summer. What was that all about if not politics?
2
So if it turns out that Ms. Ford is lying, what happens? Judge Kavanaugh has already had his character assassinated in the town square. What penalty would Ms. Ford pay for lying? Hopefully, Ms. Ford will at least be under oath.
3
Absolutely no reason why this incident should see the light of day. A 15 year old girl had a very drunk 17 year old boy attempt to kiss, grope her and "grind" on her body at a party in 1982. Why is this relevant to anything? If the woman was traumatized for life, why was she? Has every girl who has been groped by a teenage boy been traumatized for life?
Why is she pursuing this complaint with such intensity? This is quite freakish in my mind. My supposition is that is a deeply disturbed professor of psychology. Calling her "Dr. Ford" does not impress me one iota. If you prefer to give her the deference of her academic title, then let us put her personality under a microscope. If she wants to destroy a man's career, then lets do discovery on her motives, psychological or otherwise for doing this.
5
Well, let us, by all means, “hear from all the parties involved.” Who does that entail? Brett Kavanaugh, his accuser and his friend Mark Judge are the only parties involved. By the accuser’s own account, no parents or other witnesses have knowledge of the incident. The accuser should have the chance to present evidence for her “highly credible” claims. If none exists, the confirmation must proceed as planned.
1
While this plays out, let the Dems keep the klieg lights on the:
1) Missing documents from K's past,
2) his potential conflict of interest in a case against Trump,
3) an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal crime, and
4) the fact that this seat belonged to Obama's appointee, Merrick Garland and was stolen by the Republicans
The public's attention span is short. Use it!
2
Let's take a moment to assume everyone in this case is trying to tell the truth; i.e. let's assess the situation in good faith. Is there an explanation that doesn't involve lying? Of course there is.
Dr Blasey is obviously tramatized by the event; she even tells a therapist about it roughly 30 years afterward. This is understandable; fearing for one's life is not readily forgetten. But how do events appear from Kavanaugh's perspective? Even assuming he is not black-out drunk, the events are probably not very memorable: he takes a girl into a room for sex and is interrupted by a drunken partygoer. The events are even less memorable from Judge's perspective: he goes into a room and jumps on couple of partygoers.
At a basic level, it makes sense that Dr Blasey would remember that something happened while Kavanaugh and Judge forget all about it. It is plausible that no one is lying.
2
This accusation seems more than a little suspicious. It defies common sense and may prove to be a good example of why our culture needs to stop equating an accusation with an evidence-based conviction. The timing and selective memory of the accuser make this accusation highly suspect. She can remember that all party goers, except the two accused boys, had only one beer, but she cannot remember the place, the year, the host, or the other guests or how she got home -- all details that might help to prove or disprove her accusation. While I oppose Kavanaugh's confirmation, I oppose character assassination more, even when the assassin has the purest motives, as I believe to be the case here. To take some liberty with the words of T. S. Eliot: There is no greater treason than to do the wrong thing for the right reason. Those are my honest suspicions and prejudices going in, but in fairness I am willing to put my reasoned suspicions and gut-felt prejudices aside and hear the accuser's explanations and Kavanaugh's defense with an open mind before reaching a final conclusion.
3
If the Republicans on the committee are smart they won't ask her a single question, confrontational or otherwise. Then simply cast the vote they were planning on casting before this uncorroborated, 35 year old accusation surfaced that cannot possibly be proven or disproven. This is all about Roe v Wade. If you want it overturned vote for Kavanaugh. If you don't, vote not to confirm him. Simple as that.
1
Having attended an all-girls Catholic high school and interacted with boys from our "brother" all male Catholic school, I have some experience with the culture that could breed this behavior. Say what you will about same-sex education but there was a tendency to view the opposite sex as "other" as a result of the lack of day to day interaction and opposite sex friendship. When the only cross-sex interactions are mixers and dances, girls are seen as "scores" and dates, not friends or classmates that you work with on science projects. I remember our schools used to arrange days for us to go to the boys school to have some discussions or classes together. I once found myself in a stairwell as the only girl with four boys. Did they ask me if I was lost or needed help? No, they started making lewd comments about my body. Can I remember if I was between the first and second floor , or between the second and third floor? No, but I remember their words clearly, and yes, that was more than 30 years ago.
4
How many of the proposed Supreme Court will be Catholics? 6/9? Will this affect a decision on sexual misconduct/coverup charges against bishops/cardinals? Compensation for victims of predator priests? Didn’t at one time the Court ideally reflect the country’s ethnic/religious composition?
I watched Kavanaugh at the Senate Judiciary Hearings and he's as polished as Gorsuch. Both hide their true agendas in service to their ambition. They shirk from honest answers. Here are just three examples -- of the Supremes, no less -- answering tough questions with candor during their own nomination hearings: Notorious RGB when asked about a woman's right to choose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VfUB7PgW4o
Watch Justice Sotomayor in her nomination hearings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMoatA0LWxI. And here is Justice Elena Kagan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgdetb9A4aY
And in case any true Republican feels slighted, here is Robert Bork, who famously derailed his own nomination by speaking honestly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ffTtOMIJAk
Here's the moral of the comment: Kavanaugh is a liar. That what he showed during the nominations hearings. And what he is accused of doing to a young girl when they were both teenagers, rings true. He defense rings false.
3
At various points in our lives, we are put into situations that require us to make decisions that demonstrate who we are. There are lines that sometimes get crossed that show our character. This is where Kavanaugh failed. He crossed a line when it came to teenage drinking. And he crossed a line (I believe Dr. Ford) when he pushed a 15 year old into a bedroom and locked a door behind her. These acts demonstrate the character of an individual who has no place on the Supreme Court and, actually, no place in government. Just like the current president.
3
This fiasco has led me to conclude that Republicans are governed only by their desire to stay in power regardless of the damage to the country, and Democrats are feckless for the same reasons. Kavanaugh clearly perjured himself in 2006 and now. This person is a political operative first and foremost, and should not sit in judgment of anyone or anything.
The founders' greatest fears have materialized since Reagan, and I believe the events of the last twenty three months will end as a matter of fact all hope for our republic.
2
Hold your horses, folks. Wasn't there a third party present during that supposed incident? Wouldn't his eyewitness testimony be important, if not essential?
Accusations are easy to make. Proving them is another story. In that context, that third party's recollection would seem to me to be of the utmost importance.
As for dredging up Anita Hill, may I remind everyone that after she got done, the majority of Americans including the majority of American women did not believe her.
2
A woman that accused Judge Moore had her home burned to the ground. This is what a woman can expect when she comes forward like this. Then there is the public shaming, the quick assumption she is a liar, because you know, wink wink, she's a woman. What positive impact can a woman expect for herself when she comes forward like this? Nothing, but, hopefully, the next time, another woman, the next woman to notify us of sexual assault won't be shamed and possibly believed.
1
Let’s remember the man (?) who nominated Kavanaugh to a lifetime Supreme Court position is himself a serial sexual predator. And I am sure he would overlook such behavior in Kavanaugh. Which is a very sad commentary on our government.
2
The #MeToo movement has been weaponized for political purposes. That's a shame and will harm women who come forward with claims since it will all be seen through a political prism.
4
@John T: The lack of a #MeToo movement allowed men to get away with this behavior for years, decades, indeed centuries. And that has served male political power and purposes.
3
@Anne So all the more reason NOT to weaponize the MeToo movement as a political tool, right? (Don't make me 'mansplain' the logic here.)
I note the comment concerning the profile of a false accuser cites another article drawing upon mere annedoctal reference to about a dozen cases. This is not statistically valid support for this point.
1
If people are interested in getting to the truth, either Brett Kavanaugh was not like( allegedly depicted in his yearbook) as a party guy and apparently referred to with an altered name in the Judge book or he is somewhat different. Who was Bart O'Kavanaugh? The author should know that, at least.There are facts we may never know like where this party was held. But I am sure there are others who were there who can corroborate whether Kavanaugh was there or not and people who can indicate what kind of teenager Kavanaugh was. Finding out should be pretty easy. You may not be able to find out the facts in the case. But it certainly should not be hard to determine what kind of kid Kavanaugh was. What that will require is time. And if this is rushed through, does anyone think that someone won't keep looking? If the picture that emerges is not a rosy one, then what? If Ronan Farrow ultimately writes an article on him, after he is confirmed, that paints an unsettling picture of him, that would be a disaster for him, Republicans, and the country. No one is so clean there are no skeletons in the closet to be found. If someone opens the closet door, always better to say there is something in there beside cardigan sweaters. Because if the person that opened that door turns on the light.....
1
Christine Blasey Ford has a compelling story to tell that no Republican Senator wants to hear; and that, rather than Brett Kavanaugh's long-suppressed episode of attempted rape of her when they were teenagers, is the soul-destroying scandal that has effectively torpedoed Circuit Court Judge Kavanaugh's quest to become the next confirmed Justice on the Supreme Court. It is no excuse that Kavanaugh, then 17, and a student at the all-boys Georgetown Prep, was 'staggering drunk' when their encounter occurred during the summer of 1982. Ms Blasey Ford, now a PhD and a professor and researcher in psychology at Palo Alto University, was then 15 years old.
Thirty-six years is a long time to hold close a guilty secret, but that's what Kavanaugh knowingly did, through several FBI personal background checks for the various federal jobs he's held since graduating from law school, including the judgeship he now holds.
There is a false equivalence here, because Senate Republicans are complaining that Ms Blasey Ford did not tell her parents about the incident or notify law enforcement. Really? What 15 year-old girl volunteers that? What about Kavanaugh's obligation to make disclosure, as required of him for his high level federal jobs? Six years ago Ms Blasey Ford disclosed that incident to her husband and their therapist, and she identified Kavanaugh by name. It's turning out to be a replay of the 'Obama-born-in-Kenya' conspiracy accusation this was all planned. And it's shameful!
3
Christine Blasey Ford took a polygraph test and she passed it. Kavanaugh should take a polygraph test and it should be released to the Public and to Congress. What's good for the Goose is also good for the Gander ... so step up to the plate Kavanaugh!
5
A full investigation of this credible allegation against Kavanaugh demands a delay in proceeding with his nomination beyond just the testimony of the principals. As the editorial board notes, the FBI needs to conduct and to conclude an investigation before proceeding.
This raises another point. There never was any legitimate reason to proceed with this nomination at breakneck speed absent production of all relevant documents and materials. As is his wont, this rush to confirmation is just a cynical, hypocritical and nakedly partisan tactic driven by Mitch McConnell.
In addition to a delay to investigate the sexual assault allegation, this nomination should not proceed until all relevant documents and materials have been provided to all senators with ample time to review them. This should include adjudicating the dubious claims of privilege asserted by the administration regarding ove 100,000 items and an independent review of the production and redaction of items from the Bush library. Only upon provision and examination of all such materials should the Judicial Committee reconvene its hearing on this nomination with another round of witnesses and testimony by the nominee.
Of course, these would be moot points in the Senate if Brett Kavanaugh decided to do the honorable thing by withdrawing his nomination and resigning his seat on the DC Circuit. (If he did so, then the Senate would need to convene hearings on flying pigs immediately.)
1
When did Professor Ford notify Congress about her accusation? I believe it was July 2018. Somebody needs to ask, what happened between July and September? ... was it more credible in September than July, or was the serious issue weaponized for Anti-Trump purposes rather than for the benefit of the Ford?
6
@Marty Rowland, Ph.D., P.E.
She spoke with a reporter, took a polygraph test and hired a politically connected lawyer.
1
Dr Blasey wouldn’t come forward
In July- so no person, no case
She decided to come forward once journalists sniffed her out and then she had no choice
1
If being qualified for a governmental position (never mind the level) is going to be determined by how one behaved as an adolescent, then woe be unto us to find the right candidate(s)! Young people beware! If you have some idea that being elected to public office could be in your future, begin your ascent to sainthood, now! Waiting until you are 20 or 25 might be too late!
3
@Kiwi Kid: Just don't assault people. It's not that hard.
2
Before believing her I would listen to Malcom Gladwell's podcast called Free Brian Williams on how Williams believed he was in a helicopter under attack in a war zone but in reality was in the helicopter behind that was safe. He lost his job and had to apologize. The point on past memories was we tend to combine memories and create a memory that is a hybrid of several and false. She may remember it exactly or wrongly. How can you tell for sure?
4
If the Republican Senators try to "Anita Hill" Dr. Blasey, they will repulse me even more than they already have.
VOTE this November, and turn them OUT of office!
Our democracy and our country's decency is at stake. Ask anyone around the world.
4
Bad Boy Bart O'Kavanaugh wrote some pretty telling items on himself in his senior high school yearbook...
Isn't doing multiple kegs an indication of underage drinking?
Isn't that against the law in DC too?
Really? -- Yale improperly vetted this high school senior, and now he's being fitted for his angel wings?
He may have fooled all the sophisticated Jesuit men responsible for educating him about character, but the rest of us know how guys like this get ahead... connections, connections, connections...
This is Trump's Washington establishment pick. Amy Coney Barrett is the replacement choice, when Trump gets serious about draining the Washington swamp and putting people from elsewhere in the country in power...
Wouldn't a pro-life Catholic woman with zero drinking scandals in her past beat a Brett or a Bart (O')Kavanaugh any day? Trump should smarten up, and pull this current nomination Monday after both testify, and put Ms. Coney Barrett up for a vote.
It's time Catholics, and others, start hearing conservative women's voices too...
1
THIS IS A . . . he said/she said case?
One thing that makes Christine Blasey Ford’s drama so believable is the way Judge Brett Kavanaugh ruled in his recent (2018) case over a 17-year-old immigrant's request for an abortion. Although the law was clearly on the 17 year-old’s side, Judge Kavanaugh did everything he could in his judgmental decision from the bench to both delay to the nth degree and psychologically torture that poor pregnant girl.
Think upon that, and then ask yourself if Christine Ford’s story doesn’t become a lot more believable? I feel very strongly that Kavanaugh's willingness to psychologically torture that poor pregnant girl gives Christine’s story a solid ring of truth. It shows Kavanaugh’s disposition towards women. . . . . . . . . I hope that particular case is brought back up during Senate questioning so that it can help shed light on Kavanaugh’s personality disorder.
7
Throughout the confirmation hearings we learned almost nothing of substance about “the potential jurist “ who evaded questions with the air and privilege of Tony Soprano being questioned by his thug counterparts.
What troubles me is the absolute lack of personality and character that has been on display—and that we now rely on the good name of Dr Ford to illustrate a telltale component of this potential jurists personality.
4
@MK
Every single case he's ever worked on, including papers he's written throughout his career as a judge, were made available. The committee was provided as many documents as 5 SCOTUS nominees combined.
If that isn't enough, nothing will be.
2
An official FBI polygraph should be administered to both Kavanaugh and Ford and then both should provide sworn testimony to the FBI. A privately administered poly is not the gold standard and therefore is not legally binding. Although this examination may not be full proof, it will likely get us closer to the truth.
@tylertoo
No polygraph is "legally binding," nor even admissible in any court in this country. Wonder why that is?
3
What is wrong with this Editorial is the accusation that rape and denial is a product of the Trump era. It is not, but we all know that. Trump is not the first president to be accused of sexual harassment, or even rape. Bill Clinton also was, by at least 8 women. Trump is also not the first president to deny each and every accusation. So did Bill Clinton. So did Hillary when it was her husband who was the accused. She was vicious towards Bill’s accusers. In short, NYT, don’t politicize rape and sexual harassment. The focus should be on why so many powerful men of both parties engage in bad, or even criminal, sexual behavior.
5
@SW
It has nothing to do with politics. It is character and culture that dictates these things. All people deal with men like this at every level of society. if Kavanaugh were a poor man's boy there would be a different path to this place but the result would be more or less the same.
1
Of course America needs to Hear Brett Kavanaugh's accuser.
And, she has a name: Professor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
And, she has plenty of superb qualifications other than the fact that she was a cheer leader in her senior year.
4
One thing we know that The Times does not mention. Studies have shown that memory is not at all reliable, especially of emotionally charged events. Take a look at an article from Scientific American about the fallibility of people’s memories of 9/11. The subtitle captures the essence: "Recollections of the circumstances of how we first heard of the 2001 terrorist attacks may feel extraordinarily vivid and true, but they are flawed.” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/911-memory-accuracy/ Other studies over the years have come to the same conclusion, that E.g., https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=117140
After 36 years, memory is just about worthless without corroboration. A woman can in good faith believe she remembers something that in fact did not happen. Memory could transmute an unwelcome flirtation into a sexual assault, for example. Anyone who denies that is denying the science and should join the climate change denialists in the corner.
7
@Cynical Jack
These studies are highly unreliable. None of them take into account the quality of a person's mind prior to the "event" that is being examined as a test.
Memory, long prodigious quality useful memory is what the human race had before writing.
It is not the human mind that is problematic it is the education and circumstance of the individual, those they interact with and whether or not they have been taught to properly remember that affects how memory works above and beyond innate individual habits. What if they have been filled with the lies you are perpetrating here and encouraged to think that not remembering or not remembering correctly is normal when it is not normal at all?!
That is a Grooming tactic not a scientific result.
2
You say Kavanaugh's response is that of an innocent man. It would have been more appropriate to his present position as a judge and desired position as a justice if he had first acknowledged to Dr Ford.that he understood her pain, exhibited the empathy of a "wise" man. What he had to say thereafter might have sounded a tad more credible. Kavanaugh, however, is neither wise nor diplomatic. Above all, he has been caught multiple times by lies, halftruths, and evasions. He should withdraw himself from consideration.
4
This is a side point, but why did Senator Feinstein hold Ford's letter about Kavanaugh's alleged assault for a month and then only release it a week before the vote on his confirmation? This seems yet another example of the Democrats dithering and acting weak rather than taking strong, immediate action, comparable to President Obama withholding intelligence about Russian hacking during the 2016 presidential election. Senator Feinstein should explain to the public the reasons for her inaction.
9
My guess is the delay was deliberate. In an attempt to delay the vote as long as possible (possibly until after the midterms) the Senator released a last desperate volley. Maybe not too bad a play. We will see.
Having spent most of last night watching TV pundits leaning (to put it mildly) towards Dr. Ford's story, I must express my dismay with the fact pattern presented by pro-Ford guests and hosts.
Specifically, they repeatedly cited "corroboration" in Dr. Ford's story to a therapist years before Kavanaugh was nominated for the Supreme Court. But as initially reported by the Washington Post, the therapist's notes are silent on who the attackers were. There is no mention of Brett Kavanaugh.
So it's entirely possible that the event happened exactly as described by Dr. Ford - but with different male actors. It's common knowledge that if you're going to tell a whopper, lace it with enough ancillary truth to make it seem credible.
It must also help a lot if you have many truths you can cite emphatically - while testifying to a central lie. Afterward, those pundits I mention can reasonably state that her testimony had the "ring of truth".
5
@HurryHarry
First, Blasey in no way meets the profile of a false accuser. Second, what could she possibly have to gain by making up a false story here? She has no prospect of personal gain and will lose much.
1
@HurryHarry
Please link to this "original" WaPo article as I recall the Emma Brown article says she did state the names in 2012. It was in 2002 when she was first getting close to her now husband that she recounted the assault without naming names.
Nice try at sprinkling your lies with bits of truth.
2
Sen Orrin Hatch has made up his mind as well..." she's mixed up".
2
@Harley Leiber
Hatch has no credibility whatsoever. He thought Merrick Garland was a great choice until Merrick Garland was Obama's choice. Look it up. He praised Merrick Garland as a centrist who would be approved by all, until Mitch McConnell decided not to respect the President Obama or Merrick Garland enough to give him a hearing in 2016.
2
This is politics today "Democrat Style". The timing of this event and the "facts" behind it scream set-up. Hearing out this event that took place 36 years ago and the fading memories of the the accuser make it impossible to verify. This is all an attempt to build up reasonable doubt. 65 women attest to Cavanaugh's charactor. An unproven alleged event taken place when they kids should overcome this?
Certainly Cavanaugh did not leave a trail of victims as did others in the me too era. Being cynical is too small a word to describe my reaction. If anybody in public service (usually a conservative) comes up against this type of moral lynching; why bother going through it?
As with the past ie Anita Hill the last minute smear is at work again.
Imagine the book deal and money Ford is going to get in the future. The old ends justifies the means is in play. Hopefully enough senators will do the right thing as opposed to bowing to the lefts sophistry.
5
@majorwoody: "Certainly Cavanaugh did not leave a trail of victims as did others in the me too era"
Give it time.
2
@Anne, Yes vetted by the FBI 6 times is not enough? Should we wait a few years and appoint a liberal judge that just so happens to fit your agenda? Trump was elected (he did win) by the people; not the left.
To everyone saying "Dr. Blasey has everything to lose, nothing to gain."
I, and thousands of other men and women, enlisted in the Armed Forces because we believed in our country, believed that serving was the right thing to do. We all knew that death was possible - the ultimate everything to lose.
I make this point only to say: sometimes, service itself is the gain.
Surely you can see how someone who finds the legal positions of Mr. Kavanaugh repulsive - as many do - would be willing to sacrifice everything they have built to ensure that Mr. Kavanaugh will not sit as a judge for the next 40 years? The ultimate professional sacrifice, in service of an ideal...
Did Dr. Blasey do that? We don't know; personally, I sincerely doubt it. But the mere possibility is why everyone - EVERYONE - should be demanding nothing more than a fair, impartial hearing. If Mr. Kavanaugh is to be denied, it needs to be done in a way that leaves nothing to doubt.
1
I am assuming that Dr Ford never made a public big deal about this at the time and never spoke to Kavanaugh again or at least not about this event. I think it might be entirely possible that he has no memory of it. He was drunk and he probably never experienced it as such a much. I think he may not remember it at all because it never registered as anything significant to him. He wasn't traumatised and never noticed that she was I tend to believe it happened but I also believe that he might think he is telling the truth when he denies it. Understand, this is not excusing him.
As a start, Kavanaugh should be given a polygraph test.
6
To be clear, no one is advocating trying a decades-old attempted rape case; if that were the case, there would be criminal proceedings that could result in prison time or other forms of legal punishment for Judge Kavanaugh.
This is about whether Judge Kavanaugh's behavior, in his alleged actions as a teenager and in his adult decision to deny them completely, falls below the moral standards that we apply to Supreme Court justices.
If Dr. Blasey's account is true, and I have no reason to disbelieve her, not confirming Kavanaugh is a pretty mild outcome.
3
Judge Kavanaugh may truly not remember some details as he may have suffered from an alcohol blackout. People in this condition can still do complex behaviors like driving a car, attacking someone but have no memory about the activities. This is not a total explanation but could be a contributing factor for his denial of the event. Thus both parties are believable.
5
The professor brought up the memory of sexual assault in 2012 during couples therapy. She had no way of knowing Kavanaugh would be a Supreme Court nominee--- or that Donald Trump would be president in 2018.
Nor did any of us---- not in our wildest imaginations.
It's ridiculous to make this a conspiracy and doubt her motives. It's perhaps misogynistic. The appropriate step would be for Kavanaugh to withdraw from consideration.
12
@One More Realist in the Age of Trump
Nonsense. In 2012, Kavanaugh had already been a judge on the court of appeals for 6 years, which is a very high profile post.
3
@One More Realist in the Age of Trump. I disagree that men should be brought down on a mere accusation or one day of testimony outside a court of law. Every single person present on US soil is entitled to due process...both the accused and the accused. The growing calls in this comment section that people accused of sexual assault or rape must immediately step down or resign is against every democratic principle of due process. I expect such jettisoning of constitutional principles from the alt right, not mainstream liberals.
2
@GMooG
He was already a judge. If she had a planned conspiracy to stop Kavanaugh, why would she not come out 6 years before 2012 to stop him?
Obviously she didn't! You're grasping here.
From the editorial board: “First, there is no upside for women who come forward with stories of sexual harassment or assault, especially when the accused is a famous or powerful man.”
I disagree. In this case, there is only upside for Ford.
The upside is fulfilling her “civic responsibility” (as Ford called it). I have never heard of a sexual abuse victim seeking justice as a “civic responsibility”. Perhaps, as a Democrat working in California academia, she believes derailing Brett Kavanaugh at any cost is her “civic responsibility”….for the good of the country….by any means necessary.
So the upside is:
1. Ford succeeds in derailing Kavanaugh.
2. If however Kavanaugh is still confirmed, she is viewed as a heroine for fulfilling her "civic responsibility".
Either way…no downside.
8
@rfmd1
It is baffling to me that more people aren't saying this. "Nothing to gain?" Have we forgotten that so many men and women serve for the sake of service?
It might not have happened in this instance. That's not the point. That it COULD quite easily happen should be enough to give everyone pause about using this argument to show veracity.
2
@rfmd1
The downside is being trashed in comments, threatened, terrified, maybe killed.
1
This certainly makes for must-see television. I am guessing the citizens of Rome felt the same way about the shows offered to them in the Coliseum. Both are awful.
The situation alls out for private meetings and for the withdrawal of the nomination.
This woman doesn't need to be re-traumatized again.
2
Your proffered “solution” is to kill off Kavanaugh, which the Dems have hoped for all along. That explains the 11th hour delivery of this letter. The writer wanted anonymity, as had Anita Hill decades ago, but as in the case of Anita Hill the Dems preferred publication to any offer they had made to preserve her privacy.
2
I keep see variations on the "boys will be boys" defense.
This wasn't a 7-year-old throwing a rock at a window. It was a pair of 17-year-olds sexually assaulting a frightened and trapped 15-year-old.
It they had shown shame and apologized, which is what one would have expected of the hypothetical 7-year-old, these arguments would have a different flavor.
4
@KJ
If they had done that this would not even be a public issue and dare I say it Mr Kavanaugh's character issues around women's healthcare would not be an issue. I think there is a definite connection between the two things.
5
Right since his nomination by Trump the Brett Kavanaugh issue is surrounded by one controversy or the other, yet given the level of politicisation of the matter, Kavanaugh will ultimately be confirmed.
2
Men, and boys, have always sought to overpower women and girls. I do not have a single female friend, or even friend-of-friend who has not at some point, in some way, been assaulted by a male. This is an overwhelming and devastating truth. That is not to say that all males engage in this kind of bad behavior; there are good men.
It is incumbent on the good men in the hearings to root out the bad ones, or at least the bad behaviors, regardless of when or where an incident occurred.
The very last thing this country needs is another questionable man in office. It's bad enough we have one sitting for four years (please, not eight) let alone for a lifetime appointment.
13
First, this is about politics. If it were a liberal judge, the editorial would not have been written. More important: we are running out of good people who want to be in government. Look who ran for president in 2016--a pair of unqualified rogues, albeit of different varieties. If we are at the point of scrutinizing single alleged incidents during adolescence--things that happened so long ago, your only defense is that you either didn't do it or don't remember doing it--who is going to want to put himself through that kind of scrutiny to commit to public service? The EU has a concept known as the right to be forgotten: loosely, after a certain point, in response to allegations of whatever happened way in the past, the answer is, "Enough already." Indeed. Enough already.
4
"there is no upside for women who come forward with stories of sexual harassment or assault"
In this specific instance that's nonsense.
Fabricating a story like this holds out the very real prospect of becoming a hero to the left and the media, while entering the history books. Not to mention lucrative book offers, countless media interviews on air, and paid speaking tours. In other words, in exchange for saving the country from the likes of a Brett Kavanaugh (in your opinion) you get fame, fortune, and immortality. No upside indeed!
Of course there's yet no proof Dr. Ford did fabricate her story, but neither is it outside the realm of reasonable possibility. Let's hope both sides are cross-examined by the best. If Kavanaugh really did this, and therefore lied to us, let him exit the scene immediately - and in disgrace. If.
7
There were times I drank too much at high school parties and did some stupid things that I have embarrassing, somewhat hazy memories about (e.g., surfing on the hood of a car, throwing up on a trampoline), but I've never needed to write a memoir about teenage alcoholism because I wasn't a teenage alcoholic (there's a difference), and I've never, ever, attempted to rape someone. I think if you know the difference between fundamental rights and wrongs when you're sober, you are unlikely to commit fundamental wrongs even after you've had too much to drink. But, if you have deviant ideas or do not clearly know the difference between right and wrong, it will be revealed when you're drunk. The fact that there's a Bart O'Kavanaugh character in Mr. Judge's book speaks volumes, and we already know Kavanaugh has lied under oath before. Kavanaugh is not someone deserving of a SCOTUS seat. The fact that he's Trump's pick and Trump is defending him just underscores what people who do know the difference between right and wrong already understand about Trump and his enablers: they don't, or they just don't care.
19
I can't believe so many people actually don't believe that there were no newspapers and other kids of media were operating at the time of those rape accusations against Mr. Kavanaugh.
Are they trying to pretend the public is all deaf, dumb and blind?
2
Brett Kavanaugh will do well to revisit the recordings and notes and tapes from his years serving Ken Starr in Clinton impeachment trial. Because karma is a thing, Judge. The Universe is very precise in its configuration of how karma plays out. Judge Kavanaugh can prepare himself better, brace himself better. If he is innocent, he still has to undergo the kind of bad publicity he subjected others to.
7
No, we do not to have this dog and pony show. Both were minors and if this happened, it happened about 40 years ago. There is no way to prove or disprove Ms. Ford's accusation.
This has nothing to do with the fact that Kavanaugh would be a terrible Supreme Court Judge because of his far-right political views.
We Democrats have become hysterical and are losing our collective mind.
6
@Jeff
Don't use "We" as if you speak for anyone other than yourself. And there's no "collective mind."
2
"Mr. Judge later changed his answer to a straight-up denial, only to return to the no-recollection line on Sunday."
Here's that "straight-up denial". Wasn't it worth quoting in full?
"It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way," Mark Judge's statement to The Weekly Standard last Friday, as reported by CNN last night.
2
It is interesting how partisan the Republicans are and how little they care about the neutrality of the Supreme Court. So much so that they are pushing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh who has apparently not only a reputation for excessive drinking, but now an credible accusation against him for sexual assault during one of his drinking bouts. Not to mention, the $200,000 (for gambling or ball tickets?) debt that was mysteriously paid off.
Indeed, President Obama's objective choice for the Supreme Court was denied a hearing even though Orrin Hatch had earlier referred to Merrick Garland as a possible choice. But when Garland was chosen by Obama, the Senate refused to give him a hearing. This from Wikipedia with references: "On March 11, 2016, Senator Orrin Hatch, President pro tempore of the United States Senate and the most senior Republican Senator, predicted that President Obama would "name someone the liberal Democratic base wants" even though he "could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man."[79][80] Five days later, on March 16, Obama formally nominated Garland to the then vacant post of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.[81][82]" Yet, this fine man was never given consideration by the partisan Senate.
5
The Right would find their case a lot easier to argue if it weren't for Trump's grotesque history with regard to women, his Administration's attacks on refugee moms and kids and women's health, and their making it so very clear that Kavanagh is expected to vote down Roe.
9
If Kavanaugh is not to be judged by what he did in high school, why should the declarations by 65 women who say they knew him in high school be of any value?
How could a partner in a big DC law firm be so broke -- in debt?
If polygraph tests are so easily beaten and/or so worthless, why does the FBI use them?
8
I agree that the persons involved should be questioned under oath before the Senate committee. What I do not agree with is delaying it until next Monday.
We are talking about three people, who could have been flown into Washington from wherever they may have been yesterday, when the decision was made, and who could testify before the committee today. The only reason for the delay that I can see is to prep one or more of the witnesses, giving them a chance to rehearse their testimony and plug any possible holes in it.
Whoever is correct in this matter, the public would have been better served wit an immediate hearing.
2
Yes, we need to hear from Dr. Christine Blasey. But, if we want more than political theater of "he said/she said," we need, as Democrats on the Senate Judiciary have requested, an investigation by the FBI that would include testimony under oath by the only witness, Mark Judge, as well as others at the party who could confirm or disconfirm the accusation that Brett Kavanuagh did, in fact, attend the party, and that he was drunk. With the stakes so high, we need the truth not a demolition derby involving Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanuagh. Sen. Feinstein was right to refer the matter to the FBI and now it's up to President Trump, if he really wants a fair process, to order them to update their background file on Brett Kavanaugh. We are being asked to decide on a nominee to the Supreme Court; the least the Senate Judiciary Committee should do is honor best legal practice and pause to allow the essential information to be collected. We desperately need facts, not political opinion. Without them, one is left with the suspicion that the President and the Republicans are hiding the truth.
5
@Paul Wortman Which conveniently would mean any vote would occur after the midterms, at which point MAYBE control of the Senate will have flipped.
1
This whole thing feels like a sham. I am not casting aspersions on Mrs. Ford's experiences or what she said happened. I'm proceeding under the assumption she's telling the truth as she remembers it. But if so, what of it? How does she prove it? How does she corroborate any of it when it happened 36 years ago and 2 of the 3 people who could give testimony claim it never happened? Mrs. Ford is an educated woman, she knows how the law works. She would realize she didn't have a case, or anything resembling a case against her attackers, that any action taken on her behalf would be essentially humoring her because without evidence the law has no basis for meting out punishment. All she had was the media equivalent of a loaded gun and a history-making opportunity to foil a supreme court nomination. Everything I've heard suggests she wasn't eager to pull that trigger, but she didn't have a problem handing it to people who would.
3
The editorial board begins with high-minded statements about the process but quickly devolves into unprincipled attacks. First, it links an unqualified, unambiguous denial with Trump's behavior. What more should Kavanaugh say other than (paraphrasing), "This is false and never happened"? While bemoaning the baseless attacks on Ford, the board then engages in the same conduct toward Judge. Had Ford levied her allegations in the weeks, months, or even year after the alleged attack, it would've been much easier for Ford to state unequivocally that nothing happened because he knew in 1983 (1) where he was that night, (2) that he wasn't at the house, (3) that Ford wasn't with them, etc. Ford waiting 35 years puts everyone in the impossible situation of trying to remember details from decades ago and forces Kavanaugh to prove the negative. Last, the board asserts that Ford hasn't done anything to impede her credibility. That overlooks a lot. First, waiting 35 years, not telling anyone near the time of the event, and not recalling many details would give plenty areas of inquiry on cross-examination. Also, she has placed her mental health records at issue by asserting that her 2012 couples therapy notes support her assertion. She should disclose any earlier mental health records--if she received earlier therapy but never mentioned this assault in those sessions, that gives us reason to question the 2012 therapy notes (that also diverge from her recollection viz. assailants).
6
Only a man, and one who has never been on the receiving end of sexual assault or rape, would ever suggest that memories of the incident like the one at issue was "too long ago" to be credible.
Still in doubt ?
Ask any female friend if she has had any such experience, or if any of her friends have shared their experiences with her.
If you do that, you may be stunned at how crystal clear their recollections are (not days of the week, but faces noises, clothes, words).
That' what can happen when you experience trauma.
You may also be stunned at how many women have been victimized by "normal" boys and men.
Women have had enough.
15
@r mackinnon
I am a woman, and I question the memories of someone 30 years ago precisely because that's when my groping incident occurred.
I've had quite enough of other women projecting their irrational emotional responses onto me and all women, for that matter. You do not speak for all women, and I would really appreciate your not invoking us all to support your personal allegations.
4
Without commenting on the specifics of the Kavanaugh/Ford case at all, I found the linked Quartz article about "the profile of a false accuser" seriously flawed. The author says, "it’s exceedingly rare for a false rape allegation to end in prison time. . .since records began in 1989, in the US there are only 52 cases where men convicted of sexual assault were exonerated because it turned out they were falsely accused." The conclusion is completely unwarranted from the facts given. There is no way of knowing how many men convicted of sexual assault were not guilty, only how many the system ultimately exonerated. As we know for many other crimes, there are a lot of innocent people in prison, and most of them never successfully exonerate themselves because the system strongly disfavors reopening convictions. Again, not commenting about Prof. Ford's case in any way.
2
The Republicans carefully stage managed this Supreme Court nomination.They knew that Kavanaugh had an extensive paper trail so worked to limit what could be released.If they were so worried by the paper trail they could have chosen any number of other conservative judges.They thought they had contained the information that pertained to work for George Bush and let out all the flattering information.They were too clever by half- who could have guessed that an accusation from years earlier would arise?They are still committed to managing the nomination- how about letting there be more light than heat!
6
We can reasonably presume Mr. Judge is correct when he says he "has no recollection..." Of course he wouldn't since both of them were stoned drunk at a very young age. At least Mr. Judge has sought help and has come to grips with his past. Arguably we cannot make the same assumption about Kavanaugh.
6
If you look at court records going back to the 1800's there is plenty of evidence that women have lied, cheated, stolen, abused, etc...Not saying that this woman is lying, but the fact that the #metoo movement acts as if women do no wrong is going to be its downfall.
7
@Mr. Slater
Thanks for providing irrefutable evidence that women and their wily ways can never be trusted. Score another victory for the He-Man Women Haters’ Club!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBIC8JTQMMQ.
1
"It is also increasingly the modus operandi in the age of Donald Trump, regardless of the accusations at hand: Don’t engage with the specifics, just deny, deny, deny."
This sentence demonstrates precisely why we are innocent until proven guilty, and why the government must prove the crime. As easy as it is to say "the guilty always refuse to engage in the specifics," we cannot forget that it is difficult to engage in specifics if the accused truly has know knowledge of them.
The need for a day in court is never greater in this era of instant-speed communication. A slow, methodical, thorough, respectful hearing is best for both the accused, the accuser, and the public. We need as much certainty in the truth as possible.
1
The judiciary committee is wrong to reopen the hearings.
This information , such as it is, was developed and available for presentation during the hearings. This is not information that came to light after the fact.
As such, it is simply the stuff of a predictable and childlike ruse on the part of the Democrats, who can no longer be embarrassed by anything or anyone.
This is a blatant and cynical stunt, accepted as legitimate by no one with any common sense.
6
This is a seriously misleading editorial. Let me comment on one aspect, the statement that there’s no possible gain for Ms.Blasey by coming forward, so she must be telling the truth. This may be valid in most cases, but it is wrong, and highly ingenuous, in the current situation.
Ms Blasey lives in one of the most left-of-center regions of the country; and has become a hero to most of her friends and colleagues. She is a faculty member at a liberal college; it’s likely coming forward will enhance her chances of promotion; that’s often the way things work in the liberal world of academia today. She may write and sell a book.
Her lawyer is not a run-of-the-mill attorney, she is a Washington politico who thrives on publicity.
The Democrats who are supporting her, beginning with Sen Feinstein, have a tremendous amount to gain, both in sabotaging the nomination of a very qualified, but conservative, nominee to SCOTUS, and by using the publicity to influence the upcoming election.
None of this means Ms. Blasey is or is not telling the truth. Personally, I think she believes what she is alleging. Perhaps something happened 36 years ago. But all parties, including Ms. Blasey, were teenagers at the time, and all had been drinking. Ms. Blasey did not report the allegations to anyone for over 30 years, and only then to a therapist when her marriage had issues. She remembers virtually no details. There is simply no way anyone can know today what occurred.
11
@Alex
Thank you for pointing out the huge political stakes and, thus, gains to be had here. Honesty seems to have stumbled badly.
5
@Alex
First paragraph- The premise is only opinion and false. "disingenuous" is the word you meant to use. :)
Second paragraph- All opinion with assertion of wishful thinking as fact. BTW the Bay Area has a very strong Conservative movement and Palo Alto and the peninsula in general is the most Conservative area of the Bay Area.
Third paragraph- ?? IDK or care "who" the lawyer is.
Fourth Paragraph- Again opinion and assumption stated as if it supported the conclusion drawn w/o argument or proof.
Fifth Paragraph- Finally you address some facts though wrongly. She talked about it in 2002 well under 20 years after the fact which is on teh short side for a child victim of sexual assault to speak on the topic. It is common for it to take more than 30 or even 40 years for the victim to mention it. She does remember details and states them clearly.
All in all you have done a typical GOP unthink job. Which is taking a predrawn incorrect conclusion and describing reality in such a way as to fit that conclusion.
Sorry but the NYTimes’ explanation for why this isn’t an attack by Democrats doesn’t pass the laugh test. The fact that Sen. Feinstein sat on this until now lends more credence to that argument, not less. Which party benefits from this disclosure at this exact moment in time? Certainly not Republicans, whose nominee is now in jeopardy and whose accuser will bring the whole issue of sexual assault front and center in the minds of midterm voters. This is not an issue Republicans excel at addressing. So of course Democrats are thrilled this accusation became public in mid September of an election year. If Feinstein had disclosed the accusation in July when she received it, the whole issue might have been resolved by now and most certainly wouldn’t have the same political payoff as a mid-September surprise. This accusation must be investigated seriously. But don’t pretend the timing of revealing the accusation isn’t suspicious for political reasons. Feinstein knew exactly what she was doing.
11
What does Dr. Blasey stand to lose by making this accusation? Just about everything and apparently, the attacks have already started. What then, does she have to gain? She is trying to tell America that Kavanaugh is not the good person he wants us to believe.
The FBI is closely examining her statement as well as Kavanaugh's denial. They have given her a lie detector test which she passed. Have I got the facts straight? She is sounding like a very stand-up person.
SCOTUS is already taking on the aura of a partisan tool and if presidential appointments mean more of the same, then Kavanaugh has no business on the Court. Especially with a cloud over his head.
3
A White House of cards now appears official.
2
This whole episode just smells. It is the salacious details of questions Kavenaugh wanted to ask at the Clinton/Lewinsky investigation. It is the lies about the emails, it is the friend who suddenly can't remember, it is the rushed and forced nomination, it is Kavenaugh spending all day at the White House. It is a rich white frat boy who feels entitled. It is all of this and more. When is it ever going to be not the woman's fault? Trump doesn't care. He just wants control. The GOP doesn't care. They control everything. Who will care? Dr. Blasey cares. She is going to be sliced and diced by Republican senators who will use Republican women to denounce her. While Kavenaugh will piously expound at the Supreme Court. Kind of like Clarence Thomas.
4
The fact is that 'nice boys from good families with great reputations' can and do sometimes attempt and carry out rape and other acts of violence, drunk or sober. Mark Judge, who claimed his friend Brett Kavanaugh didn't commit sexual assault (although later changed this to say: "I don't remember") put this quote in his high school yearbook: "Some women should be struck repeatedly like gongs."
Judge also wrote a book detailing the common pattern of binge drinking at the prep school he and his friend Brett Kavanaugh attended. Since he admitted to altering the names in his book, Judge should be asked to testify under oath whether his portrayal of “Bart O’Kavanaugh,”who “puked in someone’s car the other night” and “passed out on his way back from a party" was in reference to Brett Kavanaugh.
If in fact Brett did indeed get drunk to the point of puking and blackout, which is realistically quite plausible, this needs to be made public. Other students surely would have have seen him getting drunk. More students need to come forward to state whether Brett was drunk at after-school parties. We are only as sick as our secrets.
Despite the fact that this was 36 years ago and was never reported, if this allegation is found to be in fact true, since Brett has denied it, he should be disqualified.
3
Confirmation of the sexism against men. I’m voting Republican.
2
@Shamrock: You were going to vote Republican anyway.
2
@Shamrock
Identity politics combined with the "resistance" -- a toxic brew.
1
It's quite simple, Dr. Blasey took and passed a lie detector test,
Kavanaugh should also take that test. If he refuses, he's guilty and he will refuse to, no doubt.
2
False memories can be as traumatic as the real events.
4
On the one hand, it is easy to dismiss the alleged assault as drunken teenage folly. However the accused could be granted a lifetime tenure on the nation's highest court. Especially because S.C. members serve for life, they need to be of the highest ethical caliber. Let's hope the Senate gets this right.
For the republicans whom have not bothered to find out and do not care.
#1) Just because you guys are amoral and will literally do anything to get what you want with impunity you do not get to assert the "other side" does also.
Kavanuagh cannot get a security clearance his credit report and lifestyle is so profligate and beyond his means. That alone disqualifies him for the job he has now which of course also means it disqualifies him from the SCOTUS.
The man is mendacious, of course all republicans are so how could one know if one is a republican? BTW Ms Conway's assertion of "What we know..." Where she lists integrity etc about Kavanaugh does not stand up to reason. If it were true we wouldn't be entertaining Ms Blasey's accusation. We are because we do not "know" these things about Kavanaugh and Ms Blasey's accusation comes across as very credible.
The trauma of the assault was still so painful in 2002 she was only able to tell her husband that it took place. She couldn't name names yet.
In 2012 she brought it up in a couples therapy session. I think she did name names then.
Mr Judge outed his drinking buddy in "Wasted". If Brett was drinking like that then it's very likely he might have been blacked out when he did it, though I doubt it. BTW has anyone paid any attention to his drinking? He sure looks pale and sickly enough for it to still be an issue.
If it were that would make the spending of money he does not have on trivial things make more sense.
3
Prepare for a slew of answers using this one and only sentence:
“I can’t recall.”
Upon which the next question should be: “If you have an unreliable memory what makes you think you’re qualified to have anything to do with the law and jurisprudence?”
This follow up question has been wasted on Jeff Sessions. Please don’t waste it this time on Brett Kavanaugh.
1
@Opinioned! I’m afraid it’s going to be Mrs. Ford who says I don’t recall more often. She doesn’t have a year or a place. You can’t get a protective order without a time and place. Ask any judge.
6
Kavanaugh claims he never assaulted Dr. Ford because to him, the 15 year old girl was simply an object to be used for his sexual satisfaction. Once used, she was just discarded and forgotten.
He needs sensitivity training, not a seat on the Supreme Court.
3
Until about 1920, if a woman married a foreigner then she lost her U.S. citizenship. If a man married a foreigner, then the new wife became a U.S. citizen. Obviously, you can tell which sex wrote the rules. How far have we come? All women should vote. Every chance we get.
5
@Phyllis Mazik
Yes, amazing how little men know or care about women's history.
Who owned the money and property a woman brought to a marriage? Who ruled and owned the children? Who could have whom incarcerated in a mental hospital? Etc.
If a lie detector test was given to Professor Blasey in order for her story to be taken seriously (she passed), then surely it is only fair that Kavanaugh takes the same test.
7
Here is what makes Brett Kavanaugh's and Mark Judge's "no recollection" so troubling. The successful and unsuccessful sexual encounters and simple dating, you have at 15 last a lifetime, partly because when you are at that age you replay them over and over again. I was 15 once.
1
@Ashwood8 She doesn’t have a year or a place, nor any other details of that day. That will not even get you a protective order. It will get you a laugh at a prosecutor’s office however.
5
The NYT is implying that Kavanaugh is guilty -- and lying -- based on what Trump did and Trump Jr. (and others) said. It doesn't mention that Ford, Kavanaugh and Judge were not the only ones at the alleged party. There were at least one other girl and four other boys. To prove Kavanaugh a liar, Ford should disclose the location of the party and name at least some of the participants other than Kavanaugh and Judge, who deny being there. The other participants should be called to testify and that will end the matter. If Ford can't name the location of the party or any of the other participants her recollection is too flimsy to impugn Kavanaugh's character unless at least one other accuser materializes.
5
Quite apart from his actions as a drunken teenager, Judge Kavanaugh believes that government (he!) has the authority to limit women's reproductive options. He doesn't feel the same way about men's medical care.
So, as an originalist, where in the Constitution does he find the authority to interfere with a family's personal medical decisions?
5
That’s actually backwards. Where does it say in the Constitution that states don’t have the legal power to regulate or prohibit abortion?
1
Be careful what you wish for. Right now it's hard to envision a scenario where dragging up decades old behavior would be bad for Liberals/Democrats, but it will come. Be careful what you wish for.
10
Guessing this will guarantee a record turnout from both sides come election day. Let's vote angry!!
1
What's underlying this is something ugly about what it means to be a 'man'. It's also about something even more fundamental: power.
For high school boys, having sex is as much about status as anything else. Girls aren't people - at a certain level and to a certain kind of mind, they're trophies. They're prey. Kavanaugh was going to an all-male school for elites - why wouldn't he feel entitled to sex as part of the package? What's the point of privilege if you can't indulge in bad behavior?
These people have a problem with women who aren't compliant, who fail to acknowledge who is supposed to have the power in a relationship.
The GOP is an authoritarian movement - leaders must be seen as 'strong' - and that includes keeping women in their place - that's just how it works. Trump has made it part of his brand as well as his character. The GOP is okay with that.
Betsy De Vos is throwing out Federal policies intended to help rape victims on college campuses. She's protecting the future Kavanaughs over the future Fords. She shows the other side of this - how enablers are rewarded.
Just as 'economic anxiety' is used to excuse racism and xenophobia, sexual anxiety and fear of losing dominance is being used to excuse atrocities against women. Look at where the InCel movement festers; look at where the attacks on women who come forward against powerful men are coming from.
Some people are unfit to have power. Keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court. Vote the GOP out in November.
12
@Larry Roth
"For high school boys, having sex is as much about status as anything else. Girls aren't people - at a certain level and to a certain kind of mind, they're trophies. They're prey."
Agree. Kavanaugh wanted to hurt his victim, not to make love to her.
Mark Judge, imho, knows what happened. In detail.
He will have various incentives to tell the truth: getting his books back in print and selling them; avoiding perjury; getting famous. He already looks better than Brett: he was the one who prevented Brett from carrying out what he intended to do to his victim.
2
I am truly offended by Senator Orrin Hatch's comment that "Dr. Blasey might be “mixed up” and confused Judge Kavanaugh with someone else." It would appear that Senator Hatch has not considered the possibility that it could be Judge Kavanaugh who might be "mixed up" and confused.
16
#Me Three! I am not willing to believe the accuser, ascent a pattern of behavior consistent with the claim. In this case, I do not believe the accuser because I have experienced young women's crying wolf too many times.
I am a college professor. 10-20 years ago, I was one of two men in a committee of about 7 who constituted my schools's disciplinary committee for nearly 8 years. Take the following two allegations that would have expelled a student and ended some guy's career :
1- The allegation of rape was made because the gut threatened at young woman from a conservative community that he was telling her parents that she was sleeping around with lots of guys, if she does not explain why she dumped him. Creepy.... but not sexual assault.
2- A couple goes to a party, a bit out of town. Guy talks to another pretty woman. On the way back they get a bit lost for 30 min on rural highways, but eventually they make it back. No touching of any kind took place Young woman alleges attempted rape to everyone he knows.
4
I absolutely agree that we should hear Kavanaugh's accuser, just as we should hear Kavanauh's rebuttal.
Our nation, however, needs to remember that an accused is innocent until proven guilty and has the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to confront the accuser.
And while a Senate hearing is appropriate to address this matter, I have a concern that Judge Kavanaugh is NOT going to be able to cross-examine the witness...nor is the witness going to be able to cross-examine Kavanaugh if he chooses to testify.
These are essential matters of due process and need to be respected. Direct testimony that is tested only by proxy does not qualify as being able to confront the accuser.
The onus of proof is on the accuser, not the defendant, and the accused is going to have to have something more than her 35-years of silence and an oh-so-convenient touch of conscience even to get to "a plausible" accusation.
And when you factor in the fact that Kavanaugh's mother issued the ruling that had the accuser's parent's house foreclosed, you have an undeniable motive for the accuser's interest in revenge.
This is just all-too-convenient to be allowed to be placed on the table without serious testing of her recollections.
3
A telling vignette that showed the judge's true character was the attempt by the father of a Parkland victim trying to shake Kavanaugh's hand. The look of disgust (and not taking the hand) was very telling.
7
Even if the FBI carefully investigates the crime (possibly crimes, as she was held prisoner, kept from screaming, and it was 2 males against 2 female), the Truth that we all crave, is unlikely to ever be proven.
So, how to find a Solomonic outcome?
The Welfare of the Public should come first. The best solution, to my mind, is to game out the Costs and the Benefits - to society - of either outcome: the appointment of Judge Kavanaugh, now under a huge cloud of suspicion; or the appointment of another, whose presence on the Court will not be a constant distraction and disgrace - due to a flawed committee process, which over time has been viewed with greater and greater suspicion.
There is a high risk that the appointment of Judge Kavanaugh will not serve society and will inflict on the public another man, capable of deciding on the Rights and protections of women, but who may well have failed to do that in their personal life.
If Judge Kavanaugh does not sit on the Supreme Court, he still has a seat on the Appeals Court. As such, he might feel wronged. But women’s rights might better be protected.
Again, we may never know for certain what happened the night Dr. Ford was assaulted and traumatized. She, like Professor Anita Hill, will not be forgotten by history or women.
But surely a better candidate can be found, given the cloud that has always hung over the Thomas appointment and the worse cloud that will follow if Judge Kavanaugh joins Judge Thomas.
3
Credible allegation? Dr. Ford does not even remember what year the 'traumatic' incident occurred that supposedly threatened her life. Nor does she remember where the party took place. Those are two pretty big things to not remember.
As someone who has been through an event that did threaten their life (armed robbery in an apartment where I was tied up and placed in a bathtub with a gun to my head)... I remember every detail. The date, time, the perpetrator's face/clothes, what I did to get out of it and get help, talking to the police/detective, the sleepless night, and going to work the next day to tell my boss I would be out for a few days, his face when I told him, etc. It is not something you forget.
As for the polygraph, read the description carefully that her lawyer has so slickly put out... It says that Dr. Ford was truthful about the accuracy of her statement, not the actual details in the statement. In other words, if I tell a lie and then am asked by someone if their understanding of the lie I told is accurate, then I would be truthful.
But this editorial board had already made its decision on Judge Kavanaugh before this allegation came forth so I am not surprised by the tenor of this commentary. I do wonder though, where is the blame on the Democrats for forcing this woman into the public by leaking this letter and who supposedly did not want to come forward at all (yet obtained a lawyer and did a polygraph in August... which raises other questions)?
11
@Chris
You say “Dr. Ford does not even remember what year the 'traumatic' incident occurred that supposedly threatened her life.”
She reported that she was 15 at the time; she is now 51–do the math.
BTW Why did you trivialize 'traumatic' by putting it in quote marks but didn’t do the same with ‘supposedly’?
1
@Roxie
I can do the math, but why can't she? All she says is that it happened in the early 1980s. Or wait, she said she knows she was 15 at the time, so why can't she state the year? Read the Washington Post story. There is no detail there except for when it is seemingly convenient for her narrative.
An event where you fear for your life, you remember vividly. Why doesn't she?
And let's not even get into the whole 'repressed' memory aspect and the can of worms that opens up about veracity of claims.
@Chris
“All she says is that it happened in the early 1980s. Or wait, she said she knows she was 15 at the time…”
“Or wait”? Apparently, you went back and reread the WaPo story and found you missed the part when she KNEW when the incident happened. And don’t you know you could have deleted the previous sentence before posting?
According to the WaPo story, she remembers being “pinned her to a bed on her back and (he) groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth. ‘I thought he might inadvertently kill me.’”
Apparently, those details are just “convenient for her narrative” and not relevant enough detail for your exacting standards.
“And let's not even get into the whole 'repressed' memory aspect…”
Who are you talking to? I didn’t say anything about “'repressed' memory” in my comment.
What would Brett Kavanaugh be willing to lie about for personal and political gain? His activities in the GWBush White House? His participation in the 2000 Florida recount Brooks Brothers riot? His advocacy while working for special prosecutor Starr? His open-mindedness about subjects that are certain to come before the Supreme Court?
Take whatever time is needed to let the full Judiciary Committee look for the whole truth on all subjects about which there is a question with respect to this nominee. The whole truth. On all subjects.
1
There is a cadre of boys from wealthy families
who carry a sense of entitlement. Kavanaugh was one of those boys. The fact that he is being considered for a lifetime position where he will make decisions on women's health issues is frankly terrifying.
Well the time for privileged white men ruling over all the rest of us is over. Trump is the last gasp of
that system trying to stay in power..
We cannot have another disgraceful and lying appointee the likes of Clarence Thomas.
6
I would love to be the fly on the wall while retired Justice Kennedy sits muttering to himself about all this.
The entire situation stinks, from start to finish.
3
The Monday hearing is not an "investigation" and the media needs to stop referring to it as such. The Republicans are simply having each individual present their side of the story in order to have enough votes to push the nomination through. Trump himself has called the hearing "a little delay". (Why did the Judge spent 9 hours huddling in the White House yesterday in preparation for the upcoming farce?) As someone else noted, the intent of the hearing is not to learn the truth but rather to clear the way for Kavanaugh's confirmation. Those old white men are not qualified to do any type of sex investigation--particularly Orin Hatch who has already stated that the hearing would not change his mind because the "the woman must be confused" as opposed to Kavanaugh whom he says he believes because he knows him very well. I implore the NYT to stop referring to the hearing, as an investigation and call it what it is: a hearing to justify the votes for Kavanaugh from the likes of Susan Collins and a few others.
5
"This is the sort of denial that an innocent man would offer. It is also increasingly the modus operandi in the age of Donald Trump, regardless of the accusations at hand: Don’t engage with the specifics, just deny, deny, deny."
What specifics can Kavanaugh possibly engage in if he's telling the truth? Should he explain where he was the night of the party? No can do because Dr. Ford doesn't remember when the party took place - including the year. How can Kavanaugh engage in specifics for something he says never happened?
1
So, when the FBI vets a nominee, one of the questions needs to be "When you were in high school, did you ever get drunk and do something bad?"
The point is not that this happened so long ago; it's that IF it happened, it was done by a teenager who lacked the maturity to stay sober or behave well when drunk. There is no history here. No pattern. No reason to think the boy alleged to have done this is the man nominated to the court. Maybe more accusers will come forward, but in the age of #MeToo, one would expect that to have happened already. Is there any doubt Sen. Diane ("Sure I'll Protect Your Privacy") Feinstein has been beating those bushes since July?
While we don't know whether Judge Kavanaugh misbehaved, we do know that Sen. Feinstein did, At best, her political stunt will put the Court in play in the mid-terms, perhaps the surest way to get right-wingers off their duffs to vote Republican. For a significant portion of the GOP voting electorate, the court was a big issue, and, if it is behind them, they will stay home in November. But if the issue is still alive, they will show up. The anti-Trump voters are already going to turn out. The SCOTUS issue will get out more additional GOP votes than Dem votes.
2
So basically, your theory is that we have no evidence regarding Kavanagh and shouldn't try to get any because hey, boys'll be boys, but we know for a fact that that Woman Senator is evil. And anyway look out, lib'ruls, the People shall arise.
It is the hight of irony that these charges from 36 years ago are made at the last minute where there can be no trial with appropriate due process.
Judge Kavanaugh was thoroughly investigated by the FBI and yet these charges never came up.
It seems clear that the Democrats have known about this before they made the accusations, yet held out to the point where Judge Kavanaugh could not possibly have due process in a trial.
In effect, they are playing games to deprive Judge Kavanaugh of his due process and that is inappropriate.
We have to stop incentivizing this sort of behavior of attempting to deprive others of due process. The Democrats could have given this matter more time but chose not to.
Games played for political reasons that deprive someone of due process should not be accepted.
8
@David MD
Odd how many men regard appointments to the SCOTUS as a game.
And how many forgive Kavanaugh for attempted rape since he didn't get to "third base."
My guess, and it might just be my hope, is that the delay until Monday will be used to line up a replacement nominee and give a plausible timeline for Judge Kavanaugh to say the stress on his family has become toxic and thus he is withdrawing his name from consideration.
5
I TOTALLY BELIEVE Dr. Blasey...
Something similar happened to me 60 years ago. My mother believed me and spoke to the superintendent who spoke to those involved. NOTHING happened, except that one of the perpetrators felt enabled to taunt me in the hallway of my small high school.
17
One thing that needs to be closely examined is Kavanaugh's drinking habits, and history of any type of substance usage. I believe that it is absolutely possible that he did in fact attack Dr. Blasey, but that he might have been in a blackout state and therefore have no recollection of it. The passage in the book written by his friend Judge admits to his his own alcohol addiction and tendency to blackouts. Looking at his history of drinking, and possibly other substances, over a lifetime, could help identify a pattern that may or my not be problematic. Given that a Supreme Court appointment is one of the most consequential positions in the land, it's essential that this be sussed out. In my book, a history of alcohol abuse, binge drinking, or anything other than restrained social drinking impairs one's judgment badly, even when not inebriated, and is an absolute disqualifier for high office.
9
Should we use the drunken crimes of a minor to determine their character 35 years later? This is a terrible precedent to set for all who will seek high office in America. We will now and forever examine the adolescent behavior of every politician to determine their fitness for office. Many good people who may have rehabilitated and completely changed as they matured will be discouraged from participating in government.
7
@Andy S.
Many sit in jail due to crimes committed in adolescence.
Dr. Ford has had to bear pain for decades. She comes forward at risk of further pain.
We live in a day when accusers feel more free to come forward. Let every man in every profession take notice.
We taught our son, from young on, that sex was something to be sought ONLY in a close and caring relationship, that he should not take advantage of a woman. When he was a teenager, his father found condoms in his bedroom. Upon questioning, he told his father: “I’m saving up so she can go on the pill.” At 49 he remains caring, compassionate man.
Let every parent take notice!
2
@Andy S.
Premeditated assault is self-evidently too grave a crime to allow for a career in the courts in any role at all, also if committed as a minor.
Tell that to my friend, who is 61 and still has to carry the burden of a drug possession charge from when he was 18. But at least it wasn't attempted rape.
2
Few are denying that she should be "heard." What is being questioned is the unquestioned belief in her story because (a) Kavanaugh is too conservative, (b) other women have experienced similar events or (b) Trump supports him.
These are biases that have overshadowed the Kavanaugh hearing from the beginning. The resistance has made it clear that stopping Kavanaugh (and Trump) are the only things that matter. This automatically throws these allegations into question.
10
@AACNY
Your post asserts things that are only taking place inside the minds of republicans.
She spoke of the assault when she began to get closer to and intimacy seemed possible with her now husband in 2002. She brought up the events again in 2012 during couples therapy. THAT is what is so stand out about this allegation, not the fantasy stories the GOP propaganda machine specializes in that serve to undermine confidence in our government and justify any number if unjust actions they take.
3
@magicisnotreal
Say what you will about republicans, it doesn't change the fact that assigning guilt for those frequently cited reasons is wrong.
@AACNY
"it doesn't change the fact that assigning guilt for those frequently cited reasons is wrong."
What does this nonsense mean?
Aside from his slipperiness, something really bothers me about Kavanaugh.
He has a pricy house and good future pension income, but not much else. He likes nice things. He buys lots of high-priced tickets to expensive sporting events. He puts big numbers on his credit cards.
What really makes this guy tick? Why does he desperately want to be on the Supreme Court, with a salary of a quarter million a year plus benefits, when he could be making a massive fortune in another field of law?
What does he really want?
8
@KJ
Exactly. He ran up $200,000 (!!) on credit cards to supposedly buy tickets to baseball games?? And he somehow paid off the balances off all at once on a modest salary as a federal judge?? Has he been asked anything about this?
Additionally, it's fairly obvious that he has lied under oath during this confirmation AND during prior confirmation hearings about his past writings and his work during the GW Bush administration.
And now this accusation of attempted rape.
The question shouldn't be whether or not you believe her, it should be why wouldn't you believe her taking into account his chronic evasiveness.
5
@KJ
Good question. What he may want is forgiveness. Many who abuse others were themselves abused. I wonder if Kavanaugh was a victim, maybe of his parents, maybe of the Jesuits at Prep.
He seems to be determined to punish others -- Bill Clinton, e.g., for his consensual sexual activity with Lewinsky; women in general, for using "abortion inducing drugs" (birth control); etc.
1
Mark Judge's memoir entitled "Wasted", includes a "character, 'Bart O’Kavanaugh,' who is also described as drinking to excess."
And Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's partner in this crime, keeps changing his story..."no recollection", "no", and then "do not remember" again.
He should be polygraphed and made to testify as well before the Judiciary committee.
Also interesting that he "cleaned up" his Facebook so fast.
19
The Kavanaugh case isn’t just a “he said/she said” case. There are witnesses. According to the Washington Post, Christine Blasey Ford said only a handful of teenagers attended the party. She said there were four boys, including Brett Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, who Ford says was in the room when Kavanaugh assaulted her. According to the Post, “Ford named two other teenagers who she said were at the party.” So there are at least three witnesses. Mark Judge says the incident never occurred. The other two named witnesses may support or contradict Kavanaugh's claim that he wasn't at the party.
2
@William Case
You are right, but it will not change most opinions of Kavanaugh's guilt on this forum. They will simply make any witness who doesn't corroborate her story a co-conspirator. Before you know it, there will be charges of a conspiracy. She will become an even bigger victim and an even bigger heroine.
2
It is one of the enduring issues of rape; there's rarely another witness, and the woman is always suspected as lying. That's why we rarely report it. We know we won't be believed.
1
@Anine
Christine Ford says there was a witness to the alleged assault. She has also identified other teenagers who attended the party by name.
In our country’s situation, there is no alternative but to follow this matter of Ford vs. Kavanaugh all the way through to public spectacle, but the chance of un-covering the truth by this seems highly unlikely. And that’s very unfortunate because of basic issues that are involved, especially entitlement of females not to be compromised ever for the sake of justice, from the time (or even before) birth. But with Ford vs. Kavavanaugh it’s more a political thing with all the posturing, than anything else, as far as I can see. Take another look at this editorial to sense what it says tacitly in this regard. Our national problem is Trump; and everything he’s connected with becomes a problem, soiled and of question ... “birds of a feather.” It is of note that Trump justifies Kavanaugh by virtue of several previous FBI clearances of him, while being presently condemning of the FBI when it comes to matters involving himself.
1
I appreciate and agree with your stance in this editorial.
I think it is appalling that Diane Feinstein felt she had the right to just sit on this for a month, and I do not believe the all male Judicial committee will hold Kavanaugh accountable, in spite of his habit of lying.
I am curious. How many women are on your editorial board?
2
@Jay Strickler
Sit on it???
The victim requested anonymity!
If a 36 year old charge without any collaboration derails this nomination I can't see how how we will ever find anyone to serve in government going forward. This situation is truly a scene by Kafka. What can Kavanaugh say other than he didn't do it? There is no evidence, the accuser never even mentioned the event for 30 years. What is the fair standard on which Kavanaugh should be judged?
8
She mentioned it to a therapist six years ago. Her therapist has notes. Why would she lie to her therapist? For what gain?
1
@Anine The notes are no way verification of her version of the event only that she claimed it happened. And "why would she lie?" is a standard by which there is no defense against any unverifiable claims. Since there are clearly cases like the Rolling Stones story of the UVA rape where women have lied that is not a standard I could support.
@Todd
If a man were accusing Kavanaugh of attacking him, like Kevin Spacey was accused, or the priests in Pennsylvania were accused, many years later, would the story have more credibility? Why is it that misogynists always cite "women" as being the ones who "make up" stories of sexual assault. The man who accused Kevin Spacey was believed and Kevin Spacey lost his job. Bishops were fired. Actions in the past have consequences. No reason Kavanaugh should get a pass just because his accuser is a woman!
Dr. Blasey has taken and passed a polygraph test.
Committee democrats should at least ask Kavanaugh if he is willing to do the same. Of course we all know what his answer to that will be.
The retired FBI agent who administered the test should be called as a witness before the committee, though we all know there's no way Grassley would do that.
It's worth remembering that a Supreme court seat is an un-elected lifetime appointment.
4
John Adams once wisely observed that “[f]acts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” At present, an accusation of what she describes as an attempted rape that purportedly occurred nearly 40 years ago has been leveled by Dr. Ford against Mr. Kavanaugh. Other than Dr. Ford’s recollection first articulated in 2012 which is not precise as to time and place, actual facts and evidence substantiating Dr. Ford’s allegation appear to be as non-existent as the facts and evidence offered by Mae Ellen Ewell to support her rape claim against Tom Robbins. And we know how that turned out.
I’ve tried cases for more than thirty years. Over that time, I’ve come to appreciate and rely upon the American trial system and it’s procedural and substantive safeguards that attempt to ensure fairness. Of course, the system is flawed, but it’s guarantees of the right to a jury trial, the right to confront and cross examine witnesses, the presumption of innocence, and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to convict are precious. I fear, however, that I’m out of step with mainstream thinking when so many others seem willing to dispense with those protections and accept accusations as true without scrutinizing and testing to see what facts and evidence support them.
12
@Brian Johnson
It's the new left. They have thrown so many principles out the door and justify their poor behavior by claiming "so much is at stake."
What's no longer at stake is their credibility. That has already been lost.
7
@Brian Johnson
Look! This is not a court proceeding! It is hearing for the purpose of hiring someone for an exalted position, which permits the employee to make decisions affecting the lives of 330+ Million people!
The welfare of We Millions counts way more than whether Judge Kavanaugh is to be hired.
My vote is to find a better candidate. We already made a poor hire in Clarence Thomas. Let us not make a poor decision again. Else 2 out of 9 sit on the Supreme Court with clouds forever hanging over them and their decisions.
2
Given their reliance on FOX and Newsmax and d'Souza and Coulter, given their extended history of bizarre tales and investigations of folks like Clinton, given their grotesque treatment of refugees and others, it's truly amazin' to see Trumpists complain about e idence and reason and due process and the rule of law.
There will likely be no way to determine with any high level of confidence if these events actually occurred. No doubt, Republicans will argue we therefore must give Judge Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt. I disagree.
This is not a criminal trial where Kavanaugh is facing jail time. Nor is it a civil trial where he will be responsible for monetary compensation. Rather, it is asking whether he deserves a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
If there is a credible accusation against him, that in itself could be disqualifying. Particularly if you consider it in the context of a man who also appears to have alcohol and gambling issues that apparently have never been addressed.
Surely, this is not the best a Republic of 325 million people can put forth.
4
It is all about removing control and over powering a girl or woman to force her into sex or the most intimate act between what should be consensual adults. In his case, alcohol removes social inhibitions and gives you the bravado to prove your manhood by taking away womanhood. Man is the boss and women only have rights that men allow them.
In her testimony she states how close she came to actual rape in this attack and the results of this emotional and physical trauma remained with her as it would become a serious trust issue for future relationships. She knew first hand, and at a young age, what is was like to be a sex object only to someone who was channeling his inner caveman.
3
We can't have people in positions of power who might have committed silly acts of sexual folly in their youth.
Brett Kavanaugh and Al Franken should resign or withdraw their nominations.
Oh wait, I see that Al already did.
2
Trump emphatically denied knowing Stormy Daniel.
Hundreds of Catholic Priests emphatically deny sexual abuse.
Kavanaugh emphatically denies being at that party.
I am not saying Kavanaugh is guilty but we at the very least need to hear what Dr. Ford has to say. As proven time after time a denial does not equal the truth.
11
The only question is whether equivocating Mark Judge is willing to risk 5 years in jail for lying to the FBI
3
I like your optimism, but I seriously doubt the current environment will have any effect whatsoever on Kavanaugh's nomination beyond this small delay. The Republicans obviously didn't get any of the #MeToo memos that are apparently devoured as Trump's hors d'oeuvres.
1
Calling the claim "credible" is generous. The support for your belief is convenient speculation to achieve your goal of destroying this man, as it facilitates your crusade against Trump, regardless of fairness or justice.
9
@No
I don't think the word "fairness" and Trump (or for that matter, republicans) should be used in the same sentence.
3
@No
Using the known facts in this case construct an argument that supports your post please.
It’s totally possible that neither Kavanaugh nor his friend remember this night. They were “totally inebriated”, which means that it is possible that they blacked out. It doesn’t mean that it is by any means OK what he did, it only means that it may very well be that a 17 year old boy, totally drunk, in the 1980’s when no generally meant “try harder” to boys and men, lacks sufficient memory. I would be very interested to see a polygraph.
****however, it doesn’t actually matter whether he remembers it, if he did it. There is no excuse for this behavior. This isn’t a court of law; we don’t need a preponderance of evidence. Ms. Ford presents herself as a trustworthy, reliable person, who only loses by bringing this forward. It’s enough to believe her and the right decision would be to withdraw Kavanaugh for consideration.
Let’s see if times have changed since Clarence Thomas.
10
A Supreme Court justice is supposed to be beyond reproach. A charge of unwanted sexual aggression years ago is serious and both the accused and the accuser should be heard in the interest of fairness and in a public forum.
What Judge Kavanaugh is accused of is felonious behavior. This incident is serious, not just a pantie raid or college prank but an assault on a teenage girl's body and her psyche.
Republicans only want Kavanaugh confirmed and have grudgingly agreed to Mondays's hearings. This is not what they want but this is a step in the right direction. It's time for the GOP to do the right thing.
4
No matter your political leanings, we should all shudder at this: an accusation, 36 years old, that no one can prove or disprove, about something that may or may not have happened when the nominee was a teenager. The accuser admits she told no one until 2012, 30 years after the supposed event! If this is accepted, who among us is safe from accusations? We could live a blameless life for decades, only to have someone accuse us of something we can’t defend against and so derail our careers and our lives. This is a dangerous precedent.
11
@Janelle Allemandi
So, like, are you saying that those Nazis found hiding in the USA fifty years after WWII ended should have just been left alone? And that those kids in Pennsylvania who were abused by Catholic Priests didn't have evidence so should have just kept their mouths shut since so much time had passed? And that Kevin Spacey should still be starring on his TV show cuz that guy he threw on the bed 25 years earlier didn't have enough evidence against him? Just what are you saying here?
Key to the matter is the testimony of Mark Judge, the 3rd person in the room. See what Mark has to say under oath.
2
Judge Kavanaugh ought to undergo hypnotic regression therapy. It will clarify his cloudy memory as though sunlight is shining right through his teen years.
2
Is this going to be the standard now? Whenever a man someone doesn't like gets set to sit on a powerful job, someone out of void can bring it to a screech halt with a simple accusation and no proof?
So then we have to investigate it to see if there is anything there, but until then the candidate is demonized and fingers pointing "aha I told you he was no good!"
60
@MPA
Supreme Court Justices are the closest thing we have in America to royalty. They are lifetime appointments and are nearly impossible to contradict, given that they can strike down any law as a majority of them see fit. The people do not get to vote on their appointment. This system, within our democracy, is gallingly undemocratic.
All this to say: if we're going to have kings and queens in America, we better be absolutely sure that they're our best people. They must be exemplary. If that means digging through accusations like this, then so be it.
1
@MPA
Does the accuser have to be a man before being believable? Kevin Spacey and all those priests in Pennsylvania, Ireland, etc, etc were accused many, many years later and no one questioned the veracity of the accusations. If it had been a boy accusing Kavanaugh would you be saying just let it go, it was in the past? Really. If you remember, Kevin Spacey was a very successful and powerful actor and one accusation by a man against him from 25 or more years ago got him fired from a very successful TV series in which he was the star. There were no witnesses and no "proof" and no hearings, either. Sometimes the truth just stands out and people can see it when it is pointed out. Maybe we need to give truth a chance!
2
@MPA
Yes. Especially when that man has come within a hairs breadth of lying under oath to this same Judiciary committee during these hearings and in prior ones.
1
There's a better than even chance Kavanaugh will withdraw before Monday. Just look at Trump's statements, and the way the WH staff wouldn't even let the two meet yesterday. They know this ship is sinking.
Dr. Ford's shocking testimony comes atop a whole lot of disturbing things about Kavanaugh that have been well reported in recent days and weeks. Now, who do we have in the news again? Ken Starr and Anita Hill. Not a good look for the Republicans. They will dump him.
The big question regards which truly awful nominee the Trump WH puts forward next. Apparently the number 2 candidate was a young woman with extreme views and very little experience. There will be time to fast-track her confirmation during the lame duck. Good times, eh?
Legal experts and Senators may have known he was a liar for sometime. The rest of us found it out during his remarks the night he was nominated. In a he-said, she-said where one person is a known liar and the other is going to suffer by coming forward...well, you don't have to decide anything, really, because even before this, you know you should not put an obvious liar on the Supreme Court.
1
Some drunken assault you committed 30 years ago, never seen to matter until it's usefulness for derailing a nominee became apparent, is an interesting fact if true, but has little to do with whether to pick Kavanaugh. He's certainly qualified from a personal/professional perspective
You can probably safely assume every justice on the bench has some skeleton in their closet, you just don't get to know about it. Booze makes young people do things, and those things do not accurately express their character decades later.
Btw I do not wish or prefer to see Kavanaugh approved. I would not because of that agree to over-amplify or condone elements of a witch hunt. I know that principle aggravates my Liberal fellows, too bad.
1
The following is speculation: If Mark Judge now characterizes his teenage self as having engaged in blackout drinking, then by definition he would be unlikely to remember his actions while drunk. If "Bart O'Kavanaugh" took part in similarly heavy drinking, he too could have done all kinds of things that he does not remember—including an attempted rape.
In other words, their not remembering does not mean the actions themselves didn't happen. Judge now appears to be sticking with "no-recollection." Kavanaugh's refusal even to admit the possibility says everything about his relationship with the truth.
1
Here's a novel idea for our dear leader and his followers. Since the country is deeply polarized by him, since around 2/3 of Americans think he is untrustworthy why not try to represent all of us and appoint some else. I am 100% certain Kavanaugh is not the last person on earth that can fill this position.
4
@Thomas Renner
No. I wouldn't matter who was picked our "progressives" would not accept him/her.
2
When Kavanaugh was first introduced as a candidate for the Supreme Court I noted that there was more mention of his personal life — Beautiful girls! Involved daddy! — than his viewpoint. Records were hidden away, and it seemed there was a hazy cloud over his past. Now we see why.
The measure of a man's character goes way beyond how he treats his own children.
Ignoring his strong religious bias, Kavanaugh is still bad news. He's more than than evasive, he's dishonest, and he seems to have trouble with money.
We deserve better.
3
Ironic they brought up the Trump accusers - all made at the 11th hour, days before an election, about supposed misconduct that happened decades before. This is getting all too routine for Democrats, and with each instance, it not only becomes more hard to believe, it starts to reveal their playbook. And the only reason these hearings need to be "reopened" is because of Feinstein. She interrogated Kavanaugh, as did every other Senator, and even had closed door meetings knowing full well she had this letter. If this is how Democrats need to win, perhaps Democrat supporters should rethink their support. This is lowest of the low. Its underhanded and cheap.
5
This appointment to the Supreme Court has been a charade from the get go, but it seamlessly fits in with everything else that's going on. It's the "world's gone crazy cotillion," and the Republicans are the chaperones. Reporters and journalists routinely write about what's happening as though it's just a little wacky, a bit out of the norm. But it's much worse than that, and deep down they know it. If they were true to their craft, they would tell us that it is indeed time to panic.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
The testimony of Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh will further highlight how Americans perceive different realities depending on their view of gender and sexuality. Those who believe women are often lying, gold digging, manipulative temptresses out to slander men of good character will believe Kavanaugh. Those who believe that men with a history of conservative political positions characterized by many as a "war on women" are often hypocrites who say one thing in public and do another in private to defenseless powerless women will believe Blasey.
3
This seems like a particularly nasty way to try a 17 year old as an adult. How motivated is Ford to win politically? We don't know. I am guessing highly.
3
What I would like to know more about also is how could the Republican gather a list of 65 women attesting to Kavanaugh's character in so little time. Was the list already ready before the allegations? Are such lists routinely prepared for high cases of confirmation or did the Republicans feel the need to have one on hand just in case because of Kavanaugh's unreliable past?
2
the thing is that men who are now in their 50's were growing up in a time when male possession of women was the norm, and children were learning that "no" might mean "yes" or that at the very least a sexual encounter was (whether good or bad) a conquest and a notch in a man's belt. It is disgusting to think that was how I was raised.
But now that we know more, and society is more clear about what is not OK, we can't all of a sudden say: well that was how things were back then, so cut that fellow some slack. Too late. Can't go back, and too bad BK was raised to be a predator (like so many other men). Now he is just a predator, and shouldn't be a leader or seen as a wise sage interpreting our laws. He actually should be impeached from his bench right now. If Al Franken isn't in the Senate, and Roy Moore shouldn't have been elected, then BK should go down.
1
Of course it was all planned. If she wanted to be anonymous why hire a lawyer, why take a polygraph?
Not remember what grade you were when the worst thing of your school years happened? Not remember were you fifteen or thirteen?
Of course an upside is a chance to fight Trump and trumpism in one of the greatest fights, be a hero of Resistance.
Details, what details? You can add a color of a bed cover, a number of chairs in the room - it will be even more convincing.
But why Feinstein didn't ask Kavanaugh about it even in her private meetings with him? Ah, still was not the the moment she waited for?
4
Clearly something happened decades ago and the only witnesses are the two men and the woman. Memories are faulty as any psychologist included Blasey will attest to. Memories from some thirty years ago are even more likely to be colored by an ugly incident whatever its nature. What is clear is that the exact nature of the accusation can never be proven
1
@Kamini D We can't even conclude that "something happened". As far as we know, this is a completely made-up story.
1
@Kamini D. Nothing is clear. Kavanaugh says he wasn’t there. His friend says it didn’t happen.
Regarding the excuses made by his apologists about his age at the time of the alleged incident.
Kavanaugh was seventeen. Sixteen-year-olds get married. They start a family. They go off to fight and die for their country.
Drunk or not, Kavanaugh was old enough and smart enough to know what he was doing.
3
What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty" ? Democrats and the media have already dismissed Brett Kavanaugh from his appointment and labeled him a sexual predator before he even has had a chance to defend himself. The hatred on the left goes beyond the norms of decency and enters into the realm of a society that is in decline. Senator Feinstein sitting on the memo until it could be used strategically to ruin his chances of conformation and ruin his reputation is evidence of that hatred. Asking him about this incident should have been done in a private conversation and if true would have given him a chance to withdraw his nomination, but again that is not how Democrats like to operate. The goal is to ruin his reputation and to embarrass his family and of coarse to keep him off the Supreme Court by any means necessary.
The Democrats and the liberal media have reached new lows of despicable behavior based on the simple fact that they lost the last election. Presidents come and go but reputations remain.
9
Key moments from AHill's testimony accusing CT of sexual harassment & extreme workplace impropriety were replayed on TRMS. They are salient to the current moment.
CThomas became only the 2nd African-American ever to serve on the Supreme Court. Had he not been confirmed as a result of Prof. Hill's testimony, very likely some would have clung on to racist stereotypes about black males being 'sexually aggressive' or unrestrained in their intimate behavior.
Thus, although Prof. Hill's discomfort & unjust treatment while in an office with CT were acute (just to the extent she described with her parents & family present) the entire dynamic of the moment was completely different from what we see today. I cannot personally vouch for the veracity of CT's defense, because I felt then & still do that there was insufficient information disclosed in the hearings. As troubling as it was, CT's confirmation by a slim margin gave an Afr.-Am. justice a seat on the SC. Had that been denied, we would probably not have had a black man on the SC all these yrs. To me, that was important. Prof. Hill never said that CThomas had ever laid a hand on her, or threatened her in any way -- even if his voluble discussions of pornography were extremely improper.
Prof. Ford represents a completely different kind of disclosure. She is less likely to be as reticent or tentative as Prof. AH was: 2018 ≠ 1991.
BK claims they never crossed paths. If he is lying, he's toast.
The polygraph is very important.
2
This is much more than a "he said/she said" episode. This guy, Mark Judge (how ironic is his last name considering all of this), changes his "recollection" with the wind. The "I have no recollection" line is a popular one when a person knows the truth but is too much of a coward to speak it.
Where there's smoke there's fire. The school in question fostered alcoholic misbehavior. Teenagers get drunk at parties and commit crimes.
While we should not expect our Supreme Court nominees to be monks (or priests or rabbis), an attempted sexual rape that terrorized another individual is serious enough no matter when it occurred to disqualify that nominee.
What happened to Anita Hill was unconscionable. I love Joe Biden, but it is a heavy black mark on his political history. We can't let that happen again.
2
The accusations against Kavanaugh are not politically orchestrated.
First off, Neil Gorsuch didn't have these kinds of charges against him when he was nominated for the Supreme Court.
Secondly, there are enough political disqualifiers against Kavanaugh - his work against Bill Clinton, his time with George W. Bush, his cynical positions, his evasive answers - that they stand on their own.
We shall see whether we sexual assault allegations stick on their own merits, but they weren't cooked up by Democrats.
1
I do not know whether Judge Kavanaugh assaulted Dr. Blasey Ford. However, I do know that Kavanaugh is very likely to advance the rightwing assault on women's right to make decisions about their reproductive health.
If Judge Kavanaugh was smart and really did try to rape Ms. Ford, what could he say and do now that could still save his nomination?
He could go into the hearing room, look her directly in the face and say:
“Yes I knew you in high school.
Yes I was drunk.
Yes I did try to rape you.
Everything you are now saying about me is true.
The truth is I have never forgotten you and never gotten over the shame of what I did to you.
The truth is I have always wanted to apologize to you, but never had the guts to.
So, for whatever it’s worth, I’m doing it now.
I’m sorry, as sorry as I know how to be, for doing this terrible thing to you.”
That is what he could say, if he wanted to.
But I very much doubt that he will, because -- as the hearings have already shown -- he is dishonest, terribly full-of-himself, avoids answering legitimate questions and not nearly as smart as he thinks he is.
3
Who or what exactly does Kavanaugh represent?
Someone from an ordinary background who struggled and succeeded in reaching his own aspirations and fulfilling his family's hopes and prayers? Someone who grew up with hardworking parents who worried about making ends meet, living in a mixed neighborhood and schooling at public institutions charged with the impossible mission of rectifying the baked-in injustice and inequality left unattended for most of our history?
That's not who he is.
His mother was a judge, his father the head of a trade association lobby. He attended a private boys school, with Justice Gorsuch as a fellow student. He went to Yale and became a DC lawyer hardwired to Republican elitism, fast-tracked through partisan extremism that has become the toxic strategy to seize and hold power by any and all means, even if it rips the Constitution to shreds.
The only common experience he shares with lesser America is binge alcoholism and massive gambling debts. And if allegations prove true (not that he can deny anything having been blotto drunk when it happened) he's a closet predator who emerges when opportunity presents itself.
His signature achievement was as a lead participant in Starr's cynical sabotage of a moderate presidency, a political hijacking of history when it held promise, a template for future initiatives to thwart democracy.
So what does he represent? Just everything that's gone wrong and every intention to keep it that way.
6
Dr. Ford described the incident in detail to other people years ago and passed a lie detector test administered by a former FBI agent. The likelihood Dr. Ford is fabricating this incident appears to be close to zero.
That leaves us with Brett Kavanaugh - who appears to have lied previously in these hearings - and the throwback GOP bozos on the Judiciary Committee - who appear eager to replay their misogyny, rudeness and cluelessness from the Clarence Thomas hearings 27 years ago. The fact that Orrin Hatch jumped in already to call Dr. Ford "mistaken" is an indication of the nasty direction this hearing with Dr. Ford is going to be.
These guys never learn. I believe Kavanaugh's nomination is now effectively dead - no matter what Trump and Mitch McConnell want. I don't believe Susan Collins wants a piece of a mess like Kavanaugh.
The hearing with Dr. Ford is likely to be a fiasco on a par with the Clarence Thomas hearings, with the GOP proving they still don't 'get it' and will still belittle and abuse women and disregard women's trauma to get their way. The Thomas hearings were a world class shock that changed our culture. Watch this hearing with Dr. Ford go the same way.
Hopefully the outcome will be an even bigger blue wave in November, with women voting in record numbers to get misogynistic GOP bozos out of our government.
Enough with the GOP senators and Donald Trump!
VOTE IN NOVEMBER!
6
This time around a better job must be done of uncovering the truth. In the Anita Hill case, not all those who could have testified in favour of Ms Hill were invited to testify. As a result, their testimony is not on the record. If it had been, it might have swung public opinion in favour of Ms Hill, which in return would have swung the polls, which in turn would have swung the Senate.
The truth is everything. When I made legal submissions on an important FOI application, I went to enormous lengths to present all the facts plus documentary evidence. Then I cited all the national statutory law, the national case law, the EU statutory law and case law, the persuasive law from all common law jurisdictions including the USA, the scholarly articles in the Harvard Law Review, the ICO guidelines, the parliamentary debates at the time of the bills recorded in Hansard. Just so they were on the record. In my forensic analysis, I created spreadsheets and tables. I'm not a formally trained lawyer, but in this way I beat the Information Commissioner and his legal team in the First Tier Tribunal, and on appeal in the Upper Tribunal, who upheld my complaint against the ICO itself (where my complaint began). It took me five years and it was a lot of work, but I proved it could be done even though nobody said I could possibly win.
The FBI must ensure it interviews everyone from the time. The Senate needs to hear the testimony of everyone. The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
2
Read the NYT and WSJ editorial board publications on this issue. It will become clear how destructively partisan our society has become.
3
@Donegal, thank you so much for making the picture crystal clear. What we are seeing here is the systemic white male power structure that still prevails in this country and calls all the shots in exercising ultimate authority.
It's really no different now than it was in the past century and the century before that.
I have just returned from a trip south and a visit to the National Memorial for Peace and Justice (the lynching memorial) in Montgomery, AL. Every white person in America should visit this sacred place to bear witness to the profound evil that white men have done to display their power over black people, a monumental evil buried and denied during most of our history.
Women, African Americans, LGBTQ people, Latinos, all disenfranchised citizens of America: claim your sacred American right and run for your lives--right to the polls!
Do not doubt for a minute that Brett Kavanaugh, once seated on SCOTUS, will do everything he can to snatch it away from you.
4
For women in this country, the Senate Judiciary Committee is the absolute worst committee for there to be an all-male Republican (majority) side. This committee is the sluice for all judicial appointments. When it comes to Supreme Court hearings, the bottom line is that in the United States of America, eleven white men decide the fate of the reproductive rights of women long before the Supreme Court ever issues a ruling.
2
Applying Mitch McConnell's logic in not allowing consideration of Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, shouldn't the vote on Kavanaugh be put off until after the mid-term elections? After all 1/3 of the Senators are "lame ducks," and control of the Senate may change. As McConnell said, "Let's let the American people decide."
8
I actually found the media trolling surprisingly polite given the circumstances. Maybe I'm reading the wrong sources. I'm pretty sure the only people who doubt Dr. Blasey's accusations are those who don't want to believe and those who are paid not to believe. Kellyanne Conway seemed to admit as much in her public statements. Dr. Blasey is credible. As many have pointed out though, we're not sure whether it matters.
The Republican Congress is less than credible on constitutional integrity. See Merrick Garland. Meanwhile, Donald Trump has more baggage surrounding sexual abuse than a 747. How the religious right still defends the man is beyond me. They obviously no longer qualify as religious organizations; they are political. There's no other explanation. And then we have Trump Jr.
Here is a soul that took a nose dive off the morality tree and missed every branch on the way down. The tree never touched him. Based on his response, you'd think he was raised in bad 80's sitcoms. David Hasselhoff comes to mind but without the life saving part. Miami Vice isn't a bad guess either. Trump Jr. though is like an evil version of Izzy Moreno. That's not a bad guess actually. We're just waiting for the indictment at this point.
In any event, Blasey is brave to come forward but I'm glad she did. It's not easy but it's the right thing to do. If some the creeps I knew in high school came up for SCOTUS, I would say something too. These are bad people and Kavanaugh is worse. No soup for you.
4
In addition of not believing girls our society has a tendency to believe the rich and the powerful. Look at Sentaor O. Hatch's attitude - so arrogant while commenting on the matter. He clearly said he believed Mr. Kavanaugh and does not provide any benefit of doubt for the poor professor, Dr. Blasey. Being a senator with one sided judgement tells you a lot of his character. How did people of Utah support him so long? His male and powerful attitude did not change a bit even after Anita Hill's episode. I still believe Prof. Hill's credibility than senator Hatch's. Is there accountability of these senators one sided judgment irrespective of any solid proof?
5
Interesting that even though she never said what party it occurred at, he said he wasn’t there. Since she took and passed a lie detector test, I would expect he will want to take one to to clear his name, right? Don’t hold your breath.
2
High School? Are we talking about something that may have occurred in High School? High School?
4
@Bernie, let it be a lesson for high schoolers. Today they are an enlightened lot, having witnessed first hand the failure of gun laws in our country. Now they have an opportunity to shed a light on drinking while teen, partying while drunk and the potential of violence because of your brain not fully operating while inebriated.
1
@Bernie
If he had locked YOU in a room in "High School" and turned up the music, put his hand over your mouth to stifle your screams, ground his body against yours while trying to pull off your clothes, laughed with his friend at your terror, would that be okay?
You know when I was 6 I threatened my teacher with glue because she would not let me sit next to a girl I liked. She grabbed my arm and escorted me to the principals offices..Assault.. it was Ruth Bader Ginsberg.. I recalled it clearly.
2
@David k White, this is not funny. Judge Ginsburg grew up in Brooklyn, attended same school system as Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders. Unlikely she was either the girl sitting next to you or your teacher.
A number of comments herein have noted that Ms Blasey passed a lie detector test -- and propose that Mr. Kavanaugh take one. The fact that the democrats proffer a lie detector result -- to me -- speaks to their desperation. The tool is simply not valid. Indeed the National Academy of Sciences issued a report entitled "The Polygraph and Lie Detection" and found that the majority of polygraph research was "unreliable, unscientific and biased". The Supreme Court, in United States v. Scheffer in an 8-1 ruling (including Ginsberg, O'Connor, Kennedy and Breyer) concluded the use of polygraph was "no more accurate than coin flip".
I am sure Ms Blasey believes what she says. We will never know if it is a true memory or a false memory. (Maybe she also believes she met Bugs Bunny at Disneyland -- look up the experiment).
I personally would look for additional evidence in Mr. Kavanaugh's past to see if there is a pattern of this kind of behavior. It is rare that such behavior happens only once in individuals predisposed to such acts. And if it did happen only once, its immaterial.
3
Mr. Kavanaugh should be asked during the hearing if he is willing to take a lie detector test. Dr Blasey already has.
sometimes there are costs to wealthy white male privilege. Kavanaugh is a cynical right wing operative who is already suspected of lying in confirmation settings. Whether you have my beliefs or not, what's the rush? Let's sort this out, it's a life time appointment. If the confirmation hearings have to be conducted after the November election.........oh, right, snap. This is a big hinge point, sure if only house goes blue in November, likely, the GOP can still ram it through the senate, but boy will it be a food fight.
1
@Bill Brown. Politics isa dirty game Mr. Brown. And there never was a more foul bunch of players than the Republican Party who have lied their way into absolute power over the last 40 years. They saw their way fit to crucify Clinton over consensual relationships in the 90's, putting every salacious detail out over the internet. Kavanaugh was a lawyer in that case and suggested x-rated ( almost pornographic) questions to further the destruction of Clinton's character. Now it's his turn in the 'character assassination ' box. What goes around comes around..
6
Another important part of this whole thing is the optics down in Dogpatch and I mean that with all due respect. How it looks to the casual observer and how it's portrayed on the news are two different things, I'm afraid.
It is new and heartening to have The Editorial Board (hereafter, TEB) acknowledge that there are false sexual assault accusations. But the article cited continues to use the long-discredited 2% false accusation number invented by Susan Brownmiller (the number of false accusations in criminal cases, from multiple studies, appears to be around 8% — about 1 in 12).
Moreover there is a difference between criminal accusations and civil accusations, such as those under Title IX and in employment contexts. The evidence in Title IX cases is that false sexual assault accusations are much higher, approximately 20% in that context (a context where the accused is denied most procedural protections and the standard for a responsible finding is a bare 50.01%). In other words, even the 20% figure may be low.
And false accusations destroy lives. They destroy careers and educational opportunity. They leave the falsely accused with huge bills and PTSD for life. False accusations produce life sentences for the falsely accused, while false accusers are never punished.
TEB is right about two things: Dr. Ford appears to be a credible person. And Kavanaugh’s denial is the kind of denial a totally innocent man would make.
What if Dr. Ford is simply mistaken about the identity of her assailant from 36 summers ago?
1
I have long thought that anti-abortion/pro-life folks should be passionately embracing the #MeToo movement with the same verve and determination that they exhibit in denouncing planned parenthood. What better way to prevent unwanted pregnancies, in a universally acceptable way, than to put a stop to unwanted sexual advances? I for one am eager to give the accusers of sexual harassment their audience and due process, and it seems that this should be a (badly-needed) unifying issue in this country. Those who say that the Kavanaugh accuser's allegations, timing, etc. are part a left-wing ploy to derail his candidacy and thereby "save Roe v. Wade" are tragically mired in the drama while missing the greater bandwagon that they need to be on. If you are anti-abortion/pro-life, and you are not eager to give the accusers a complete and fair airing of their stories -- without pre-judgement -- then your motives are questionable in my book.
1
Dr. Ford will be questioned aggressively by 11 Republican men on the Judiciary Committee on issues pertaining to sexual assault of a women where they will be anxious, for political reasons if no other, to discredit the charges of Dr. Ford.
One of the issues here to consider is to what extent could these men themselves been liable to similar accusations. Statistical studies by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism provide insight in a paper titled, Alcohol and Sexual Assault. In it they state the following:
"The prevalence of sexual assault, both involving and not involving alcohol use, cannot be accurately determined, because it is usually unreported... " and so other means are used.
"... conservative estimates suggest that at least 25 percent of American women have been sexually assaulted in adolescence or adulthood ..., at least 20 percent of American men report having perpetrated sexual assault .... Due to their accessibility, college student surveys tend to employ the most thorough measures of sexual assault by including the largest number of behaviorally specific questions. These studies suggest that approximately 50 percent of college women have been sexually assaulted, and 27 percent have experienced rape or attempted rape; in contrast, 25 percent of college men have committed sexual assault, and 8 percent have committed rape or attempted rape ..."
It seems, there's nothing exceptional in Dr. Ford's charge.
2
Let’s evaluate this. Are now all to be held accountable to our high school behavior? What’s next grade school? At work or as public servants are now subject to these events? So when do we break out the drugs that make us tell everything we think or did in our lives. This whole issue stinks of dirty politics and the NYT buying in on it only serves to make me skeptical of motives across the board. And when is it time to prosecute the accusers that have no foundation or evidence of their claims?
I don’t care if this guy makes it or not but the process is very alarming and giving this much weight to an accusation 30 years old is beyond absurd.
2
Blackstone said it best. “Better that ten guilty person’s escape than that one innocence suffer.” In the day of me too hysteria we must be very careful or we repeat the past ugliness of Salem. By all means this should be thoroughly investigated. Both side should stand down and breathe. Unless you got some sound proof then it’s pointless other then to...point.
2
I do not understand why news reporters have not referred to the odd and evasive questioning on the part of one of the Senators at the hearings of Brett Kavanaugh. I was watching the interviews on TV. I can't remember which Senator it was but it was an afternoon of the hearings, I think it was Wednesday. I'm pretty sure the questioner was Republican. He asked Kavanaugh about playing sports in high school and visiting his old coach. Then he oddly mentioned something about drinking. Then he said something to the effect that we don't want to go into that line of questioning and sort of trailed off and leaned back. I say this because it appears that others on the committee knew something and chose not to bring it out in the interviews in the Senate. Aren't these interviews taped? Can't some news person look this up? Doesn't anyone other than me remember it??? Anyway, when news came out that there had been an accusation against the candidate I immediately remembered this odd moment of the line of questioning and thought, "Ah! That's what he was referring to!"
2
The Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill case did not go on trial; it should be adjudicated with all additional Hill witnesses allowed to testify. If found guilty of sexual harrassment and lying about under oath, Thomas should also be impeached.
1
The Democrats need to push for Kavanaugh to take a lie detector test. He's already stretched the truth on three issues, and those could be illustrated there as well. He won't do it, which will make him look like he's hiding something.
2
@Reva Cooper Lie detector tests are not accurate. Taking one doesn't prove innocence or guilt.
2
@Reva Cooper lie detector tests are not ocnclusive in a court of law, and In some jurisdictions are inadmissible as evidence. Think about that.
I am a centrist democrat that have supported true liberal causes. This is not one of them. How can a person be judged forever for an incident when he was a teenager? Are my liberal and feminist friends saying that a person does not evolve and change since he was a boy? Education and adulthood does not chage people? We do not act the same when we defend the rights of accused juveniles! Grouch Marx said, " these are my principles but I can change them". To blame a drunk teenager for his actions is insane.
3
The important thing about this accusation to me is that it tracks with Kavanaugh's general view of women. You don't cover someone's mouth to muffle their screams because of an adolescent misunderstanding. You do it because you think you are entitled to get what you want, regardless of the young woman's feelings about the autonomy of her own body.
That fits Kavanaugh quite well. He was a member of DKE at Yale, the fraternity that's been associated with high rates of sexual assault for decades, and was ultimately suspended from operating for five years in the 2000s for making date rape jokes.
He thinks birth control causes abortions. He has written that Roe isn't settled law. Womens' wants and needs are secondary to those of men, consistently, across his career.
So these allegations seem of a piece with the whole man, to me.
2
The most telling comment was in Michelle Goldberg's parallel column, in which she highlighted the double standards that place black youths at a severe disadvantage in the justice system:
"Such arguments would be more convincing if people on the right weren’t so selective in their indulgence. Donald Trump called for the death penalty for the Central Park Five, who were 14 to 16 years old when they were arrested. (They’ve since been proven innocent.)"
The double standards, particularly among Republicans, are sickening.
4
@Hamid Varzi
I saw this very differently. The left would never condone treating a black defendant like this -- ex., guilty without even a hearing. That would, rightly, be considered an injustice and racism.
So what is it called when the left does it to a republican? Truth?
1
@AACNY
No. It's called Clarence Thomas. But the Senate crucified the Black woman on that one.
This editorial states that there is no upside for a woman to claim sexual assault if it did not happen. This is not true. The epidemic of the so-called “repressed memory” in the 1980s and 1990s showed that many women made untrue and even preposterous allegations of rape and incest that never happened. Misled by unscrupulous therapists, these women confabulated horrific scenarios and came to believe wholeheartedly in their reality. There are academic books written about the phenomenon of false memory that show that the “upside” for these women was a handy explanation for their misery. You don’t need to take responsibility for your life if you have somebody else, an imaginary rapist or molester, to blame. Ms. Blasey may belong to the same category. Or she may not. Still, her silence for 35 years does not inspire much confidence in her testimony, and the fact that she has been in therapy for a long time makes it even more probable that it is a case of confabulation. Anita Hill’s case is totally different; as far as I know, she testified about events that had happened recently and to an adult, not a hysterical and drunk teenager.
1
@Mor
The accuser will become an instant overnight success if she becomes the woman who stopped Kavanaugh. After all, he has been identified as someone who will make abortion illegal.
Stopping Kavanau is obviously paramount to the left. She is on record opposing Trump. It's not a stretch to believe she is sacrificing everything for the cause.
@AACNY: Oh, please. If Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, Trump will nominate someone else who is just as bad.
Judge Kavanaugh is alleged to have used physical force to attack, silence and control his victim. Sexual assault is always about power and control. If these allegations are true, we have a SCOTUS nominee who displayed a pathogical need for power and control in adolescence.
We have a right to know what happened. The victim gains nothing and loses much by coming out with her story. We the people have everything to gain by knowing the truth about this nominee to the SC bench. As a woman I believe it is imperative that the nominee is more fully vetted, that this incident is investigated by the FBI. Giving judicial power and control to a man who may have a pathological problem with it is frightening
1
“Admit nothing. Deny everything.”
Not quite the same as Truman’s “The buck stops here.”
It’s amazing, nay, unbelievable, that the bulk of Americans are conniving and duplicitous liars who had the foresight 10, 20, or 30 years back to figure out how they were going to scandalously attack and undermine Trump and his minions.
Even the framers of the Constitution were out to get him with that pesky First Amendment that allowed all these people to create and vocalize their lies. Poor Donald, besieged by the common, irrelevant, and unworthy American citizens.
3
Diane Feinstein was wrong to sit on Dr. Ford's accusation for so long. She should have turned it over to the FBI when she got it last July so agents could interview all involved, determine who was and who wasn't at the party and present the Senate Judiciary Committee with the facts. That said, Sen. Orrin Hatch was equally wrong in saying he believed Kavanaugh because Dr. Ford was "mixed up." Maybe it was Kavanaugh who was so drunk he doesn't remember being at that party with his alcoholic friend, let alone attempting to commit a sexual assault.
3
Once again the FBI failed to do its job. Judge Kavanaugh has been vetted six [ 6 ] times by the FBI, and six [ 6 ] times the FBI has failed to uncover this episode. Anyone who has ever undergone an FBI background check for a security clearance at any level knows how minutely it pries into peoples' lives. It is obvious that people at the highest levels of the government have been covering for Judge Kavanaugh for decades. This could damage the very foundations of our democracy. That is, IF the truth ever sees the light of day.
2
@Albert Edmud
The republicans have been privatizing our government for a long time. Much of the work you speak of is now done by contractors who are themselves using people who are not "cleared" in the way you describe.
@Albert Edmud
Darn the FBI for not finding evidence of an act that likely did not occur!
Is it also right for the Senate Judiciary Committee to keep hidden the settlements the US taxpayers have made to accusers against those that serve in the Senate? As esteemed as the NY Times presents itself, I will only assume that story hasn't been completed yet? I'm guessing nor will it ever be. Its a shame that Diane Feinstein thinks so little of victims that have accused her colleagues of doing the same thing, didn't call for hearing then did she? Does biased ring a bell, anyone? I am no longer amazed at the passes the NY Times gives out to individuals that have abused their power. I thought equal justice under the law should be pursued by such an esteemed organization, I'm beginning to have second thoughts about your standing in journalism. I agree that these hearings should be held, if he did do this , it should be addressed, I think those in the US Senate that have used tax payer funds to settle claims ought to be brought to light to.
5
Given the complete and total lack of evidence, I think we have to conclude that even if this did occur, unless Kavanaugh admits to it, it cannot be disqualifying. Just remember, if the Democrats attempt to use this claim now, they may some day be in the opposite position and lose a candidate for the court for the same reason.
2
Brett Kavanaugh was already in a precarious situation. He waffled, used half truths, and covered up his views that were revealed in other contexts.
If Monday turns into another Prof. Anita Hill persecution by a line of white men looming over a victim, this will not end well for Republicans. Prof. Christine Ford is another educated professional woman who understands the personal costs of coming forward. Some 200 alumnae from her girls' school have come forward to support her in a letter. They would have interacted with the boys in Kavanaugh's prep school.
The Anita Hill hearing was a show trial that cast a shadow on both the American judiciary system and on the Senate. It was a McCarthy moment for women.
As Eleanor Roosevelt famously said, "A woman is like a teabag. You'll never know how strong it is until it's in hot water."
I believe Dr. Ford, and I believed Anita Hill. Both are strong and courageous women. Both have put their duty as citizens ahead of personal humiliation and in the case of Dr. Ford, of never forgotten trauma.
This is one more episode in the strange history of Trump times. A woman will speak; she will be heard. We are listening.
253
@smb If you believe Mrs Ford why did she not come out when Brett Kavanaugh was nominated to the Court of Appeals? This is a desperate attempt by the left to smear him, no evidence, no witnesses, just her word and we are supposed to automatically believe her? The Duke Lacrosse players would disagree with you.
@smb
We believe her story because so many of us have had similar experiences.
You notice that 98% of those who trash this women have male names.
Either they are guilty themselves of bad behavior or they really just don't get it.
MeToo. Enough. Time's Up.
1
@smb Excellent comment!
1
Is there anyway Kavanaugh could prove none of this is true? Of course not. She says this occurred in a closed room and with the music turned up. No one saw anything. No one heard anything. According to one report, Feinstein knew of this accusation in May but brings it up hours before confirmation vote. She said the accuser wanted her name withheld. But when his confirmation, seems certain the name pops up. The only piece of evidence he even knew her, is a handwritten note. It says "Will you be my girl friend". It has two boxes to check. She can choose the "yes box" or the "no" box. But on Monday both will testify. The Democrats will use anything to stop Kavanaugh. On the other hand, the Republicans should have the two to testify and then confirm. If they don't, there will be a lot of angry voters that will be furious. But if they vote confirmation, then those same voters could flock voting booths because they can see what will come if the Democrats win.
@Ron
So are all those people accusing Catholic priests of sexual abuse in "Closed rooms" are lying. It's a not dissimilar situation. All one can do is consider context. Did this sort of drinking and sexual lunging routinely take place among 17/18 year kids 35 to 50 years ago. Don't know how old you are Ron but if you fit the age group and say no it didn't, then either you were asleep or are now doing something else.
3
The allegation is of premeditated (the music) sexual violence, so intense that the victim feared for her life. She required therapy.
It is amazing how easily some commentators minimize the alleged event, one even referring to it as a sexual encounter that "did not go past second base". Some imply that the 15 year old Ford was drunk. Her letter does not support this idea. Others question the identity and even existence of the therapist, even though therapist's notes have been reviewed by the Washington Post.
The senate are not conducting a trial. The worst case for Kavanaugh is that he will retain at least his current level of remuneration and status. His political allies will see to that. Certainly, whatever the outcome, he will have a question mark over his character in certain quarters. So will Ford.
There are three possible scenarios, depending on the truth of the allegation, which may well remain unknowable. (1) The worst is that the Supreme Court gains a member who does not belong there. (2) The best is that the senate does not confirm a nominee who is in fact unworthy. (3) The third possibility is that the senate fails to confirm the nomination of a wrongly accused man - a potential worthy SC judge doesn't quite make it. If so, Kavanaugh would have good company, starting with Merrick Garland, but including thousands who have never been nominated at all.
Prudence suggests that, if at all in doubt, the senate should risk the third scenario.
2
I was 15, he was 17 when he assaulted me sitting in his father's car in front of my house. We were on a date on Valentine's Day. My mother made me a pretty red dress with white hearts. I started to open the door, my curfew was minutes away, when he grabbed my arm and tried to get on top of me. He ripped the front of my dress. I screamed, no one heard me. I began crying and he threatened me, "My father owns a big company and he'll stop you from saying anything about me." I never told anyone. Every time I drove past his father's company with the big sign I shuddered. I'm 73 and still remember his name.
387
@donna myrow
It was really brave of you, Donna, to write this letter. There are many, many, many women out here who understand and know this kind of behavior has to be called out. Hopefully, the time is coming when women (and men) will no longer be afraid to speak out against the rich and powerful who sexually assault others. Unfortunately, that day has not yet come. Maybe we will be one step closer after next week.
1
@donna myrow
My condolences for your story, Ms. Myrow. Forgive me as I tell the following tale to make a broader point; I do not wish to make light of yours.
I was 12, he was 23. I had looked up to him for years; he was the older brother I never had. When he offered to take me duck hunting, I was beyond stoked. Finally, a chance to show my skills to my hero. I'll never forget what happened in that blind, as my hero turned into my villain, as my heaven turned into my personal hell. When he was done with me, two mallards flew from the reeds. He calmly picked up the shotgun, sighted, and fired. "Don't ever forget: I'm a really good shot." I've never told a soul.
None of that was true.
The point that so many of us are trying to make is not that the victims of our society are wrong for speaking out. The only point we are making is that the sad truth is that we need to vet the stories of the accusers to ensure that justice for all is done. People lie - for their own gain, and for the gain of others. People forget. People make mistakes.
To all the victims of the world: stand like Ms. Myrow and tell your story. We will listen. For years, I have listened, to the victims I have helped. But please: understand that as we listen, we - the public the people, Americans - need to remain skeptical, that we need to hear all the evidence, that we need to ask questions.
Because the sad reality is that the truth is always harder to find that it should be.
@donna myrow I am touched to read your story. I hope that by sharing it now something good comes out of it at long last.
Republicans have targeted a conservative-dominated Supreme Court for 40 years. There is absolutely no chance they will stop now. I am certain another name from the Federalist Society list is being warmed up in the judicial bullpen right now, just in case Kavanaugh stumbles, and just as certain a new conservative Justice will be seated well before the midterm elections. Democrats lost the Supreme Court when they lost control of the Senate, then the White House. Nothing that happens over the next few weeks will alter that reality and its consequences (which will last for decades).
This situation calls for compromise.
We may never be able to know with absolute clarity which person's recollection is the most accurate.
But our lack of complete clarity would not be an issue if Merrill Garland were the candidate.
And make no mistake: we will not rest until McConnell's and Putin's rigging is completely undone.
2
Is this the new rule? Unconfirmed and unverifiable accusations of assault from decades ago mean a judicial nominee cannot be confirmed? It’ll be really easy for someone who opposed a judge’s politics to make anything up. Since the standard is any accusation is disqualifying, that judge cannot be confirmed.
2
Read the editorial again: it says let’s hear testimony from both sides. It is not advocating not confirming Kavanaugh.
1
@Jake
There is an unspoken premise behind your post which is both dishonest yet the thing that comes through as your intended meaning. You don't say but base your accusatory rhetorical question on an assumption that the event we are now talking about was deliberately brought up to stop the process all other efforts having failed. Then go on without providing proof of the ting you did not state clearly.
Ms Blasey contacted her Congressperson about the issue months ago long before the confirmation hearings in which Mr Kavanaugh testilied. She wanted to remain anonymous. They wrote a letter to Senator Feinstein who kept it secret as asked for these many months. The fact that the letter existed was leaked late last week. From the WaPo report I read it seems knowledge of it had been in the rumor mill long before it made the press as reporter's had been contacting people ms Blasey knew and calling her. Then the story got out. Only after what she was trying to avoid became a fait accompli did Ms Blasey step up to speak on her own behalf.
Obviously someone on Feinstein's staff leaked it or spoke of it to someone untrustworthy who leaked it.
So you see not only is your accusation not true it is actually all pure fantasy meant to stand in for real facts in whatever thought processes people who take it in engage in.
1
In normal times, it would be inconceivable that Brett Cavanaugh would not withdraw from consideration for Supreme Court Justice under such clouds. These are not normal times, however, and I believe we may actually see testimony from Ford and Cavanaugh next week.
I find it fitting that Cavanaugh may have to answer some of the types of questions he so wanted to ask Bill Clinton during Clinton's impeachment. Will he be truthful when the bright lights are turned on him? It is so easy to point the finger of blame at someone else, but when that finger points at you sometimes the world becomes less clear.
In the end, I cannot see how Cavanaugh can possibly win. It has become unlikely that any Democrats will vote in favor of him (Heitkamp, Manchin and others have been liberated with this development), and I cannot believe that there are not at least several Republican Senators who still respect decency and who do not want the public record show that they chose to confirm someone with this kind of allegation against him.
What comes after that is the million dollar question. Barack Obama would choose, again, someone like Merrick Garland...a qualified moderate who could heal some of the discord. The chances of Donald Trump choosing someone like that are non-existent. He will try to punish Democrats for opposing him, and in doing so will make American citizens suffer. You can count on it.
How did we get to such a point, and how do we get past it? Simple...vote.
11
Mitch McConnell warned Trump and the WH about the trouble a Kavanaugh nomination would have. I can't see Mitch providing cover for Trump here. First, there's no way Collins and Murkowski would let this side, especially given Kavanaugh's prior misleading testimony. Second, Flake and Corker, both prior targets of Trump's ire, have also expressed support for further investigation. I also predict that Kavanaugh will withdraw his nomination in order to protect his family from hearing this devastating testimony. She's already passed the FBI's lie detector exam.
7
Orrin Hatch's declaration that Dr. Ford is "mixed up" is everything we need to know how he will react to her testimony before it is given. Members of the judiciary committee are supposed to be fair and impartial. How can a member of that committee be fair and impartial when he has already decided that Dr. Ford cannot possibly be a credible witness? Republicans on this committee have blinders on. They are so driven to ram through Kavanaugh that it demonstrates they are incapable of being fair and impartial. These same Republican senators unfairly blocked Merrick Garland, a judge held in high esteem by no less than Justices Roberts and Goresuch. But in their desperation to please Trump, these senators have sold their souls. Unless Kavanaugh either admits to sexual misconduct or withdraws, there is nothing Dr. Ford could say that will get these men to cross Trump and his base. Which makes this judiciary committee a sham.
4
@nzierler
Fair and impartial? About an 11th hour claim made over something that may have happened 36 years ago at a drinking party where the accuser says she doesnt remember when or where it happened?
Not to mention, shes an antiTrump activist.
Senator Feinstein in sitting on Dr. Blasey's accusation for months, has weakened Dr. Blasey's position. Instead of focusing on the force of her accusation, it will lessened by the question of why now? after the hearings? is it just a delay tactic by the Dems? Shame on her.
1
If the judge has been obviously disingenuous about his actions during the Bush presidency, how can he now be trusted to tell a straight story about alleged sex-abuse? The mere fact that Dr. Blasey is willing to come forward and risk everything speaks well of her credibility. That Mr. Kavanaugh has a lot to lose, gives him a strong motive to obfuscate.
4
I was appalled at how Clinton’s accusers were similarly quashed as if they never existed, as if they didn’t feel pain because they were females who were collateral damage of a powerful male. I’m glad the tide of history is turning and rape will no longer be tolerated as a natural and acceptable extension of inherent maleness.
1
I don't understand how the law works with respect to underage sex and underage drinking, particularly in the early 1980s when this incident is alleged to have happened.
If both actions were statutory offenses, is "attempted rape" still the pertinent charge?
Reprehensible, yes. But an action at 17, while drunk, is not the same as that action in one's 20s.
There are a lot of reason to oppose this nomination, but this one is flawed, I think.
Why are the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee scheduling a he-said, she- said hearing on Monday without an independent investigation of facts and charges preceding it? Do you think it’s because they continue to try to railroad through this confirmation regardless of facts and evidence? Do you think it’s because they fear they may lose majority rule in the Senate on November 6 and want to be sure their man is in place before the voters have their say? Remember Mitch McConnell’s argument for not giving Merrick Garland a hearing because his nomination was 8 months before an election and the voters should have their say? What says he now, trying to ramrod this nomination BEFORE the voters have their say? Hypocritical is the kindest adjective I can apply here, but it’s worse. It’s total disregard for the law and our democratic institutions. It’s the Republican way.
6
@Barbara
What facts and evidence? There isnt any. Blasey cant remember when or where this supposedly happened.
Thats why the FBI isnt even taking this up.
I believe that "like attracts like". Kavanaugh like Trump is dishonest. It is evident in his political history, his responses or lack of in the judicial hearings. Still...why did the Democrats wait until now to expose "the letter"? I can come up with all kinds of theories: maybe in "good faith" they waited to see if he would be voted down without the need to totally destroy his reputation. I am suspicious. But I cannot see any reason why this seemingly successful woman would put her reputation on the line with a lie. I don't want to see Kavanaugh appointed but I want truth and honesty to prevail. I know. Truth in politics...an oxymoron. I live in a dream world.
If Brett Kavanaugh were a true patriot he would withdraw his nomination, not because he is guilty, but because he realizes the honor of serving the citizens of our country requires absolute integrity without a whiff of doubt. But I fear he’s no patriot. Just another inept guy, greedy for power.
3
@Elizabeth
Why should anyone cave to such an accusation that can not be proven?
We can all hope this incident becomes a tipping point for Republicans in the MeToo era: Believe her, and demonstrate that they can be open-minded and understanding about sexual harassment. Believe Kavanaugh, and lose the women's vote for the next quarter-century.
3
@Jim In Tucson Orrin Hatch has already determined that she is “mixed up”. He hasn’t met her, but the old white guys already know that she’s just a “mixed up” girl.
There are so many wild cards in this one. If this assault happened at all, is Blasey’s memory of the event and her description of it a fair representation of what actually happened? Why does Kavanaugh and his friend deny it? Perhaps it really didn’t happen? Perhaps they were too drunk to remember? Perhaps they believed they were just fooling around and Blasey perceived it differently? Was she drunk too?
Teenage years are full of land mines, and this described event sounds like kids fooling around that got a bit out of hand. Happens to everyone.
Yet why does Kavanaugh deny it totally? If he’s a Trumpian style liar - just deny anything bad - then that speaks of his suitability for the court.
I do find it troubling that so many accept Blasey’s account as accurate fact. As a psychologist, she would be aware of how faulty memory can be.
My head hurts.
8
The degree of violence involved in this assault is being overshadowed by the focus on sex. She was pushed into a room and held down while the door was locked. Already we're in the realm of illegal restraint. He continued to hold her down while attempting to remove her clothing, groping her and grinding his genitals against her, and finally, holding his hand over her mouth (to keep her from screaming ) so violently that she feared for her life. This is not a pass gone wrong or an enthusiastic boy carried away by passion. It's an ugly violent assault.
22
Kavanaughs convenient flip flops on issues (when politically expedient)and past misleading testimony should have been enough to keep him off the short list. His extreme denial of these accusations surrounded by credible evidence that he is not being truthful should be the final straw that he is not fit for this lifetime appointment.
10
More toxicity oozing out during the trump presidency.
If the EPA was actually funded and properly managed, it would declare Kavanaugh a Super Fund Site and commence clean up.
6
It is interesting that just before the Professor Blasey Ford accusation surfaced, the Kavanaugh team circulated a letter of support from 65 of his female high school classmates. Now, Republicans want us to dismiss the relevance of an alleged sexual assault because it occurred when he was in high school.
It should be the case that they can't have it both ways, and if what he might have done in high school is irrelevant precisely because it happened when he was in high school, so too should be letters of support from his female high school classmates. It also raises suspicion that Kavanaugh knew full well that these charges could be made public, and was cynically attempting to manipulate the public just before they did.
We might be deprived, in the current case, of a Coca-Cola can made famous by Clarence Thomas, but in its stead, we're being asked to drink what might well be a case of Kavanaugh Kool-Aid.
7
I do believe Dr. Blasey, but wonder if Kavanaugh was so drunk then he doesn't remember, so he can say with conviction that it didn't happen?
Seems to me someone at that party would remember whether Kavanaugh was there, and how drunk he was. If he was, and it certainly sounds probable, then he should admit to his drinking habits and their consequences.
3
@Patricia
Ahem, theres an awful lot of details Blasey doesnt remember, like where it happened, when it happened. When a person has an episode where they fear for their life, details like that kind of stay with you - forever. Couldnt it be possible she was drink too? Too drunk to remember?
What, I wonder, is Clarence Thomas thinking and feeling as the Kavanaugh hearings mirror his own hearing close to two decades ago? Clearly, Thomas is not being portrayed as a nominee framed. Rather he was the antagonist, the liar under oath just where Kavanaugh seems to be headed.
And what about Grassley and Hatch who are behaving just like they did in 1991? There will be no bliss for them in their willful ignorance of history and current events.
7
@Emergence
Clarance Thomas has a feeling of confirmation as to what his heart told him back in 91. That this is how Democrats roll. They orchestrate hit jobs when they are losing.
I criticize the timing of this accusation of sexual harrassment; however, even without it, in my opinion, this candidate has not persuaded me that he is qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. It's about time that the hypocrites who "campaign" to overturn Row v. Wade face the reality that making performance of abortions illegal will return the procedure to criminals and the underworld and discriminate against poor women, who cannot afford to travel to a jurisdiction where abortion is legal.
2
As Monday's hearing approaches everyone needs to keep two things front of mind - Dr. Ford has nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming forward. Kavanaugh has everything to lose and a SCOTUS seat to gain by denying. And Kavanaugh has already provably lied on multiple occasions during this process, not to mention his earlier confirmation. Who has more credibility?
2
@Peter
Of course the antiTrump activist whose claim is made at the 11th hour, days before a vote, about something that supposedly happened at a drinking party, where she cant remember when or where it happened - has lots of credibility. And if this was really so credible, why didnt Feinsten hand that letter over to the FBI the second she got it, instead of waiting 3 months, through days and days of testimony, even closed door sessions. She knew about this for months and said nothing. Why would she do that if this was so credible?
2
@Sports Medicine Attending the Women's March and donating $72 to Democrats hardly qualifies one to be an anti-Trump activist. That said, who are we to judge a woman for when she comes forward in a situation like this. Those women that I know who have suffered thru sexual assault or harassment know that going public will be painful. They don't do it lightly. I'd guess that she is already the victim of multiple threats both cyber and physical from Trump supporters since her name was leaked. As for DiFi, you'd have to ask her why she sat on the letter so long.
This episode is absurd. Not only Kavanaugh but his accuser's savior deny being there. The incident was not reported at the time, memory fades, etc. This is a witch hunt to be sure. It can no longer be substantiated and innocent until proven guilty was still the law of the land the last I heard, unless this is Salem in 1693.
5
If our politicians were interested in reason, circumspection, and the best interests of the nation they would not have nominated a divisive ideologue in the first place.
If someone chooses to harm themselves Or others repeatedly we should stop pretending it is an ideology and call it by the right name.
2
I'm deeply suspicious that this has become a typical Democratic operative strategy. This is their new play book. Every single high profile man up for some high position is to be taken down by innuendo seemingly cooked up at the last minute.
4
Why shouldn't the investigation continue into the allegation and the confirmation be put on hold? It's the right thing to do. But the republicans seem a little perturbed.
Poor Mitch McConnell! His cadence seemed a little off, not punctuated with a meaningful pause here and there but slightly off balance, tentative and unsure.
As if he could hear the American voting public awakening, listening to and reading non-fake news, preparing to vote for candidates who did not slavishly and completely give themselves over to Trump/Pence.
Addison Mitchell McConnell Jr., has-been political hack, stain on the Senate.
Soon to inhabit the same ash heap as the rest of the Trump republicans.
2
There is no way to determine the "truth" here. To use the tool of which of the two appears more "credible" is ludicrous about an event 35 years ago. Blasey could easily have manufactured this story, including who was there and who assaulted her, not necessarily as a lie, but as a result of her therapy. It is curious that she remembers every minute detail of the alleged assault, after all these years, but little else. Typically, under trauma, it’s the other way.
On the other hand, her description could be absolutely true.
How can we ever know without witnesses? And I say this knowing that there is an alleged witness who says he does not recall/didn't happen (same thing if you are talking 3+ decades ago), which would favor Kavanaugh.
That Kavanaugh's fate may hinge on who is a better actor in a hearing is surreal, especially in an important setting like a SCOTUS nomination.
There should never be a hearing about who is more "credible" about an event 35 years ago that only the very two people being presented witnessed (ignoring for the moment the other person allegedly there).
However, if there is nevertheless a hearing to determine credibility, it would seem fair game (for both sides) to attempt to destroy it. In this context, this may not be a fair fight as we are now being preached to that doubting a woman is almost a crime.
Do women never lie, but only men do?
In any case, if destruction of credibility is the avenue, Ms. Blasey may be in for a rude awakening.
4
One of the benefits of the defense Kavanaugh chose, an unequivocal "I didn't do anything like this, ever" is that the specifics around a drunken adolescent incident don't have to be proven, nor is there a need to debate if it is fair to hold him to account as an adult for a single incident as a minor. The specific incident was always going to be difficult to prove 35 years on.
However, since Kavanaugh has made this all about his veracity, if someone from the party comes forward and says "something" happened that night involving Kavanaugh or another woman comes forward with a similar story that occured anytime in the last 35 years, his nomination is most likely tanked. Similarly his previous issues under oath may be tied to this to demonstrate a pattern of lying.
Imagine if he had said instead "I don't remember doing this, but if anything like it occurred as an adolescent I am deeply sorry for youthful stupidity and any misunderstanding or hurt it caused"
The nomination would have most likely continued on track with such a defense. Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty, but fortunately he has made this about deciding the binary issue of whether he is lying or not, and not specifically about proving the specific details of this incident.
I cannot tell if my deep and abiding cynicism about our political leadership leads me to conclude that Kavanagh will be sacrificed or prevail.
If sacrificing him secures the House or Senate, he is gone. But then the Democrats have won something, so retaliation will be ugly.
But more likely from a Congress with the party in power which tried to squash the Lilly Ledbetter equal pay bill, Ms. Ford will be dragged bleeding across our screens for the crime of wanting truth to come out. Ms. Ford's personal reputation is essentially balancing on the GOP's gamble on whether they can weather the mid-terms.
At this point, I don't know who is telling the truth. All I know is that truth is the last thing that actually matters. Winning matters; the election matters; besting the Democrats matters.
But truth? That is the least of the considerations.
1
The sexual assault allegation is out there now and it has to be dealt with somehow. I fear an ugly spectacle on Monday with the truth of what happened a distinct last place result. The drama will come from both sides. The knives are already out.
Couldn't this be done by Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Blasey under oath in front of the committee but Not On Live TV?
This is serious business not a show for blood lust of either side.
I just get this feeling we're all heading into the coliseum.
88
@Elizabeth Live TV will be a grotesque display but this is the only chance that we may have of knowing exactly what transpires with the committee.
I pray for Dr. Ford to keep the strength.
@Elizabeth
Dear Elizabeth,
I agree with you. This will be watched like it is the Super Bowl when in fact these two people are contending for their reputations. Lest we forget, I think they both are also contending for their respective parties. I think the truth would suffer less if this was not televised.
@Elizabeth
You may be right but this is clearly the most important and the most consequential appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court in our lifetime.
If Kavanaugh becomes the swing vote on women's rights and has the opportunity to overturn Roe v Wade, it will set this nation back to the dark ages.
A government of predominantly old white men has no right to dictate what women do with their bodies.
The Republican Party's "our way or the highway" approach to governing should help the voters decide whether to stop fueling them with their vote. November is not that far away and the longer the confirmation process drags out the better.
American women are sick of politics and sick of religious fanatics deciding our medical fate.
Enough with politics that kick women in the face while kicking our bank accounts for more taxes.
2
Those who write to defend Kavanaugh have strained credulity if only for the fact that they abhor Roe vs Wade and will support any perspective justice to the SCOTUS who will overturn it. Let's consider this charge on a personal basis. How forgiving would you be then?
Where is the conscience of the conservative?
3
@Guitarman
This embarrassing submission suffers from the genetic fallacy as well as the fallacy of opposition. I support Roe v. Wade but am also inclined to believe Kavanaugh is innocent. So there goes your premise. Also, what is there to "forgive?" Are you perhaps getting ahead of yourself? There are so many holes and omissions in Professor Blasey's narrative it is a veritable Swiss cheese of an indictment. She recollections are confused and selective and unlike the vast majority of victims of what is now being characterized as "attempted rape" she spoke to NO ONE at the time. The memory of an event that took place 30 years will also necessarily be subject to a great many revisions and redactions -- most unconscious. She is simply and inevitably not credible -- and this leaves aside the well-documented record of Judge Kavanaugh as a man of principle and integrity as well as a good father.
1
To anyone who complains about the timing: think about the incredible courage it takes to come forward. It's true in any case of sexual assault but in this one? You're signing up to be public enemy #1 of half the country. That's a strong signal that these allegations are 100 percent true.
231
@sedanchair
Also signing up to be a hero to half of the country - she may care much more about that half.
2
@sedanchair Wrong this is actually perfect timing for the democrats, they get to "resist" President Trump's presidency, and obstruct everything he does. Did you not see the "protesters" getting paid to cause chaos at the hearings? I would take a look at Mrs Ford's bank account for suspicious activity.
1
@sedanchair
Courage? Getting a Trump appointee disgraced is a wonderful dream for this Democratic-activist woman, employed in a left-wing academic department. She would be celebrating her wonderful political victory against Trump and his administration for decades to come, and warmly toasted by all her friends. How does that take courage? You might be confusing courage with chutzpah.
Is it possible some at the party would remember something . Just placing them both there definitely at the party, particularly if it was modest in size, goes to opportunity.
I mean this as a credit to the girls intelligence , practicality, and creativity , that she wore a one piece bathing suit underneath. It also goes against a frequent tactic claiming the female somehow encouraged the male aggressor / drunk.
I don't personally think this act, if committed , disqualifies him. Nor does his attempts to manage the crisis to get the job. But just flat out lying about a past crime , when seeking the highest court judgeship in the land, does seem rejectionable. even if harsh.
1
If so much wasn't at stake, I think we would have heard a confession by Kavanaugh (born again Christians are famous for this) and a come to Jesus moment; it worked for George Bush jr when he wouldn't discuss his pre-saved wild partying. What did he famously say: Not gonna run for President if they are going back before I was 35 years old. He didn't have to worry, the press took a very hands off approach to his dalliances and drug abuse.
The thing that Americans can expect from a SC Judge Kavanaugh is that he will show little compassion or understanding for young people who stray or cross the lines, any lines. They will have their come-to-Jesus moments while serving long sentences in jail.
It is also probably too much to expect the Republicans to treat his accuser with a modicum of respect. Let's hope that Dr. Blasey is up for the task because very little "thoughts and prayers' will be headed her way. Instead you may hear whispered biblical references to young Jezebels, etc. Or they will be thinking it...
4
There are two facts that make me believe Dr. Ford without any reservation:
1) She has absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming public.
And
2) The GOP response (65 signatures) was far too swift. They knew this was coming.
For those who say "why now" and "he was in high school" I say, 1) you obviously have never been sexually assaulted and, 2) I was at a lot of drinking parties in high school and NOT ONE of my friends ever tried raping someone at any of those parties.
As someone who has a PhD and has worked with teens and adults for more than 15 years, I can also state unequivocally that attempted rape is NOT a normal teen behavior.
378
@Aleutian Low
Conservative talk shows are pushing the theory that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has Kavanaugh "mixed up" with someone else.
The WH, anticipating, had all those women sign a paper about how nice and respectful Kavanaugh was in high school but this was BEFORE the assault allegations against Kavanaugh were made public.
1
@Aleutian Low Of course she has something to gain, block Judge Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court. Dems will do anything to block this nomination.
@Aleutian Low I agree about the swiftness of the response. The quick Republican reply begs the questions "What else do they know and what are they not telling us?" What are they afraid of?
The issue is Kavanaugh, the man. What we have is one deeply offensive incident revealing a troubling, but isolated flaw in Kavanaugh the boy. If this incident is enough to convince you that Kavanaugh, the man, is untrustworthy, then you are an overly suspicious critic of human foibles.
2
Brett Kavanaugh was elusive when it came to answering very direct questions. Omission can be just as bad as downright lying when it comes to the seriousness of an appointment to SCOTUS. Dr. Ford has subjected herself to a lie detector test. Her letter is very compelling.
Even before this alleged assault came to light Kavanaugh's integrity was in question. Some of his decisions (which can be fact checked) are taking his conservative bent to far and overstepping the bounds of law.
4
Both individuals need to testify under oath. At the moment, I find Dr. Ford's account the most credible, especially given Judge Kavanaugh's rather loose relationship with honesty & truth.
6
What is happening to this judge is disgusting. Even if the accusation is 100% true, why would this have any bearing on his nomination? He was a minor, it was 36 years ago and by all accounts he’s lead an exemplary life since. I am truly appalled at the state of the Democratic Party and how low this country has sunk.
50
@JP He lied twice under oath about stolen e mails from US Senators. What Lawyer on Trump's personal legal team did he talk to? Still unanswered. We know he cheats and lies, now we find he was brought up that way. What's happening is disgusting. A proven liar is this close to a life time appointment.
@JP It is relevant because sex offenders don't usually change their misogynist views that assaulting and enslaving their victims is acceptable. A sex offender on SCOTUS would mean he could abuse his power to deny untold millions of sexual assault victims of their constitutional rights. Make no mistake: Sexual assault is never a "mistake of youth." It is a conscious choice to harm another person. If he had murdered someone as a teen, no one would claim that he belonged on the Court.
@JP
An exemplary life with the exception of lying under oath to the Judiciary committee multiple times over the years.
But hey, it's only a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land, why be so picky, right?
Let’s see if the U.S. Senators who sit on the Judiciary Committee have learned anything from the past, in particular the testimony and questioning of Professor Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas conformation hearings. I doubt it. Back then the Senators lead by Committee Chair Senator Joseph Biden treated Ms. Hill is a most despicable manner and lead the campaign to re-victimize Ms. Hill.
At least two members of the current Judiciary Committee were also members back during the vicious grilling of Professor Hill. I sadly doubt if they will show even a modicum of decency to Professor Ford and instead I believe will lead by the horrendous example of their President Trump and attempt to destroy Professor Ford’s life and re-victimize her. Then they will vote to recommend Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. I hope I’m wrong.
There is only one way to rid our nation of the current plague of corrupt indecency that infects our Presidency and Congress - vote on November 6th and vote Democratic.
2
There is no other evidence that Kavanaugh behaved like this at any other time, the only other alleged witness has no recollection of the event, and numerous women from that time have gone on record saying the allegations are inconsistent with the Kavanaugh they knew.
So there is one person claiming assault 30+ years ago with no corroborating evidence. Seems like a case of "recovered memory" to me. I'm sure Dr. Blasey believes this happened, but did it really?
6
@J. Waddell There are mountains of evidence Kavanaugh is a deeply partisan lawyer with an agenda that will harm women, the US Constitution and the vast majority of this country that isn't male, white and privileged.
1
Most of those 65 women who knew him in high school (an all male high school, how about that?) have suddenly become very mum about their support for him. But what's more, why did the White House have the character witness of 65 women from Kavanaugh's high school on hand and ready to go? Don't suppose they knew this was going to come out, do you?
1
The description of the assault is not a simple drunken encounter. The alleged covering of Dr. Blasey's mouth to silence her during this episode would leave any woman scared for life. Furthermore, locking the door is kidnapping. I have seen my fair share of inappropriate behavior from intoxicated adolescents and do not ever recall this form of violence and intimidation. Alcohol can be disinhibiting and one's true inclinations can be played out. The behavior displayed during this incident is not a simple high school prank.
Apparently, 65 women from Mr. Kavanaugh's school suddenly appeared last week all signing a petition of support of this potential supreme court nominee's character. The speed of this petition's appearance is truly remarkable. Can anyone really attest to someone's character with certainty during a brief period of time 30 years ago. Did all 65 of you witness Mr. Kavanaugh's behavior while he was intoxicated at the age of 17? That's the kind of information you would need in order to support him completely and fully under this accusation.
Perhaps Mr. Kavanaugh had a singular drunken episode and has no recall of his behavior. Fair enough. Just admit that you were intoxicated at a party and cannot recall the event. Take full responsibility of your actions. This country and its citizens are tired of the denials and the cover-ups.
16
@KH I guess that if 65 women vouched for him, it means that he did not attempt to rape them.
What I don’t like is that the image they tried to paint -/ angelic family man -/ doesn’t match the reality (or acknowledge his past). And that means he’s a manipulator ... of public image, situations etc in the name of power. We need someone who holds truth as the highest standard, not manipulation.
8
So now we are going to try a 36 year old attempted rape case? In one day? In a hyper-partisan environment where no rules of evidence will be applied? Where the Republicans control the forum? In the end, is this really likely to stop the confirmation? Or, is it more likely to hand Trump and the GOP an undeserved victory and momentum going into the midterms. This looks like a bad bet by Democrats to me.
47
@Roger
You're right, this is tough. But the worse bet that Democrats could make is a repeat of Hill and Thomas, especially in this cultural moment.
Political expedience aside, giving her a fair hearing is the moral, just, and decent thing to do.
@Roger
If the Republicans throwing a credible woman who got assaulted under the bus on live television to advance their sorry excuse for the next kleptocracy puppet on the Supreme Court, isn't going to give the Democrats momentum, I don't know what is.
This woman has the self-control to have been a diver, the dilligence and intelligence and stamina to have become a professor, the connection with integrity that made her contribute to the one integer presidential campaign that we all have witnessed three to two years ago, and no live televised forum, only a concerted effort at media blackout coupled with voter suppression and manipulated voting machines can suppress integrity when it is on full display.
I want to see Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski vote for the assaulter after this woman has testified against him in a heroic display of integrity on live television.
I think it's a dead no live sure bet on the intelligence of the voters.
1
@Roger
The Senate can't "try a rape case" even if wanted to. Hyperbole is not helpful. The hearing is a job interview, not a trial. There are no consequences for Judge Kavanaugh other than he may not get his dream job after all. /violins/
Can we stop hyperventilating over how sad this all is for Judge Kavanaugh? If he did what she says, he's a lucky man - she never pressed charges and he's gone on to be extremely successful and wealthy. Being a world class misogynist jerk hasn't slowed him down one bit. He's not owed a Supreme Court seat, you know.
I'm inclined to believe Ms. Ford and I certainly recognize how much damage Brett Kavanaugh is likely to do if he's confirmed. I hope that the nomination is stalled past the mid-terms and the Democrats take back the Senate. If that happens, Chuck Schumer should schedule a vote at which the Democrats unite in opposition. Going forward, the Democrats should refuse to confirm any Trump nominees unless he consults with them in advance. All that said, an accusation of criminal behavior 30+ years-ago when all the parties were minors is not a good reason to torpedo a nominee.
@Sam Rose, Thank you for recognizing what this is all about, delaying the confirmation. Feinstein sat on this allegation until the 11th hour. The democrats do not care about this alleged victim.
Imagine if Kavanaugh removed himself from consideration and Trump nominated Garland. That would indeed be justice for the Supreme Court. And it would certainly work to Republicans' benefit with women in the midterms. But Trump's heart is too small, and his sense of duty to his country nonexistent.
9
Suppose Kavanaugh is confirmed after the last of the testimony is heard. Faith and trust in the US Supreme Court will be diminished, and the only branch of US government with any credibility remaining goes over to the dark side, courtesy of the current cadre of Republicans.
24
Not at all. I couldn’t care less whether the allegation is true or false. High school behavior does not remotely reflect adult behavior. Obama was a pothead in high school and he turned out fine. He committed a lot more crimes than have been alleged here. From all accounts, Kavanaugh has been a terrific person as an adult and to me that’s all that matters. Plus, I reject the perspective on this issue of an organization that reconciled itself to Clinton’s behavior as an adult. Your sanctimonious hypocrisy is as bad as the most craven politician.
21
@Mark T If you believe Ms. Ford, Kavanaugh sexually abused her and may have been attempting to rape her, forcing his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams as he tried to take off her clothes. This is not the behavior of a normal adolescent male innocently and clumsily making a pass while drunk. By 16 or 17 a young man knows that forcing anyone to do something so intimate is wrong. What makes you think that such an actor probably outgrew that character flaw?
1
@Mark T Fascinating that you draw a moral equivalence between smoking pot and attempted rape!
1
@Mark T
You couldn't care less whether someone sexually assaulted someone? How brave.
1
Since when is a person's guilt dependent on how many Americans watching testimony on television before the Senate at a political hearing believe the accuser or the accused? This is not an American Idol episode where viewers vote for their favorite performer. This issue is not even one on which voters get to decide. This is a serious issue for the Senate, Judge Kavanaugh and his accuser. And it's time the voters demanded that the Senate treat the issue seriously and not, which is usually the case with Senate hearing, as an opportunity for political grandstanding.
22
For a position like Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, the mere accusation must be enough to scuttle the nomination and end his career on the bench in any lower court. Period.
@From Where I Sit
Let me know where, if any where, you work FWIS so that I can arrange for an allegation against you to be made which, whether true or not, would automatically force you to resign or be fired. Sound fair? I didn't think so.
Well, to start with, a $72 donation to Democratic candidates, is hardly coming from a woman who is trying to push a Democratic agenda, but that is not the issue.
I was about her age, roughly one year younger, when I was sexually assaulted by an older, male cousin. I didn't tell my family for years and when I finally confronted him and his family I got backlash and till this day I still do. I confronted him by writing him a letter that I also sent to his parents and four siblings. His mother, yes my Aunt, called my father and said something to the effect of how dare I bring up something that happened twenty five years ago.
What is my point or points? Many young women, teenagers, often do not come forward for a long time. And yes, we suffer from the experience whether it be depression or PTSD. Our assailants rarely, if ever, realize the consequences of their actions.
Ms. Ford is a brave woman, but she knows her story has to be heard as this man is now about to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. If he did this to her (which I don't doubt, by the way), we have to deeply question his moral fiber. Why don't I doubt her? Because who would put themselves through this if it weren't true? Honestly.
B. Kavanaugh has a way with words and can weave a denial and story or a lapse of memory. It is up to the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to see through his words and decide if this is the kind of man who should be a Supreme Court justice.
40
@LM thank you, this is exactly why we don't bring up episodes of sexual assault.
the lack of "upside" for women who come forward with complaints has been established not by public opinion but by the willful behavior of those put in charge by employers or voters to protect all of us from abuse.
the behavior of sen schumer whose outrage in behalf of "women who have been abused" has to include his own knowing suppression of the professors complaint, the same for sen feinstein, too, as an example of the "downside."
that both electeds have chosen to use the professor's complaint and the professor herself (her story true or not) for an ulterior purpose is no better, maybe worse, than any authority that has
"managed" complaints of abuse to protect priority interests.
elsewhere in today's pages mention is made of the eprofessor's early attempts to report the incident...no takers then either.
the cynicism in this, from the obvious use to derail a nomination that could not be derailed by parliamentary maneuver or "sparatcus" grandstanding, to the exploitation of #me too and all women who face discomfort and actual abuse in the workplace, (including the congress itself) gives new meaning to "bad faith."
3
Frankly, Brett Kavanaugh has way more to lose by remembering this incident in high school than reshaping his memory of himself than this woman does telling the truth. He is by all accounts, brilliant at what he does, however he is also brilliant at dissembling and shaping narratives to obscure other things he doesn’t wish to be fully understood. He may even have convinced himself these things never happened. There is a pattern in Kavanaugh’s behavior when questioned about uncomfortable topics that should have troubled his nomination, even before this revelation. The terrifying remembrance of a lone and sober, frightened 15 year old girl all these years later just adds one more problem to the list. We not only need her to testify, but we need a full revelation of his papers before any confirmation. If he has, in fact lied to Congress, it must be known.
61
You are right. In the era of Trump, "deny, deny, deny.." translates to having "no recollection".
Kavanaugh deserves a chance to fight for his reputation, which is certainly a very important part of his resume. Or come clean.
Eighter way, he will get to the Supreme Court. He is a Trump Justice.
6
@Aurace Rengifo "deny, deny, deny" was Bill Clinton's mantra until the blue dress came back from the cleaners.
Although preceeded by the claim "there are two things we do no know" the first of the "two things we know" is categorically false. Quote from the editorial:
"But there are two things we do know.
First, there is no upside for women who come forward with stories of sexual harassment or assault, especially when the accused is a famous or powerful man. "
If one is politically opposed to a male in a position of power, a false or exaggerated sex claim from the distant past can be a valuable political weapon. That is a very big upside in a politically heated environment. So the editorial's statement is false that "we know" there is no upside. We certainly do not know any such thing.
18
The last thing the GOP needs it for this nomination to rumble on into the mid terms. The irony is this is the kind of scenario they used as an excuse to ignore Merrick Garland even though there was a lot more time to consider that nomination. It will be no surprise if Dr Blasey's account is thrown by the wayside quickly to get their man onto the bench. Senator Flake gave an impassioned speech on the senate floor about the loss of principles and failure of leadership. What will he say to his children & grandchildren in years to come if he votes for Kavanaugh under this cloud? His chance and other principled driven senators to act. Actions will always show why words are meaningless
43
I just do not know if any of this will make any difference in the long run. I applaud Dr. Blasey for speaking up.
84
@Youssef
Fine-applaud away, but what are you actually clapping for?
Kavenaugh is a seriously red Republican. That is a reason not to vote for him, not because he once was a teen who-like almost every teen age boy, gets drunk and makes a dumb move on some girl.
Every boy in America-(except homosexuals, I think) would have to be imprisoned and punished for years , in a prison where HE was likely to be raped by vicious long term prisoners-in for life sentences who enjoy raping young boys to make them slaves in the Prison system.
Do #metoo ladies want all teen age boys who get stupid drunk to be sent to maximum security prisons, just so they'll be subjected to rape and sexual abuse of a violent and cruel nature which almost no female rape victims are subject to.
If Kavenaugh did what he is accused of, what is the punishment-will the victim be happy that he does not become a SC justice or will she demand he be given a whipping, then made to serve 5 years in a state prison? What is it that all the wailing women who have joined in demanding Mr K be punished, somehow, want?
Have they spoken with the mothers of any boys convicted of such offenses to see how families are made to suffer all their lives and once good students cannot attend college or high school, nor become members of any profession? Or is that the point: to rid America of male lawyers, doctors, judges and other professionals so women may take their empty places? Much like a Soviet purge.
A lot of people are taking about evidence here, which makes me wonder what kind of evidence they think they could get in a situation like this. Is Blasey Ford expected to produce another person who was in the room where the alleged assault took place to vouch for her? Even then such evidence would no doubt be dismissed as somehow made up or wrong. The only evidence will be her testimony as well as Kavanaugh’s. The burden will be on those who hear them to make their own decisions about who is lying or evading the truth and who is telling the truth without lies or evasions. This will mean having a fair and open mind as well as a commitment to honor the truth no matter what the outcome. Will sound moral judgement prevail, or will we add another disappointment to the list?
25
@Amanda
What is sound moral judgment in this case?
How can one story be made to click with another. What ought to be done to a man who was drunk, 30 odd years ago, , tried to "force himself on a girl" failed, and cannot recall the incident now. What is the right "punishment" for a man who "might have tried, once , but, having failed, never did and never tried to again? Without a memory of the incident, to punish such an alleged affront is like like "flogging a dead horse".
Might it not be better to train and teach girls to actually report and to complain about what might be a crime if it is reported in the legally required time according to statutes of limitations? Once we taught such civil responsibility. Whay do we fail now to teach the most basic of all democratic responses: reporting crimes in a timely and legal manner, without fraud or addition of fictional elements to make the complainant feel justified.
Waiting 30 or more years is just unfair to the alleged perpetrator, to his family and to the police and justice system which is called upon to ajudicate it.
9
@Amanda
If there were any evidence or another person in the room, she would not have initially made the claim anonymously.
@meloop By all means, put the onus on the victim. Might it not be better to train and teach our sons not to behave like this? Isn't that their "civic responsibility"? Isn't physically attacking someone with the intent to rape unfair to the "alleged" victim? Your judgmental response underlines why more women and girls don't come forward. I and many other women do not want such an individual to have the power to make law dictating what women can and cannot do with their bodies.
1
The line in the proverbial sand has been drawn - Christine Blasey says what happened and Brett Kavanaugh emphatically denies it as ever happening. This is now not as much about the morality of such behavior but whether it is more likely than not (in the minds of our Senators) that such an incident in fact occurred. That alone will determine the fate of Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to SCOTUS. If Kavanaugh's nomination is successful despite a credible Blasey accusation, the likelihood of Democratic control of the House and possibly the Senate would only go up and that would be trouble for Donald Trump. This is why I think Brett Kavanaugh will withdraw at the first sign of trouble.
37
Remember, we are talking about teenagers. His behavior from those years is in focus only because of his lifetime appointment to the SC. That said, we are still talking about teenagers - Mr. Kavanaugh as well the 65 ladies now - teenagers then - who certify that he was always decent and respectful towards women.
How can anybody even say that about even their own spouse of many years what he or she could never do in a few minutes after they got drunk. Teenagers consuming alcohol are not going to behave like mature drinkers.
Besides, he was in an all boys high school. How is it possible for any one of these - let alone 65 - to say that he was "always" decent and respectful towards all other female teenagers. They were not there most of the time. Or, were they?
Let's do the math. If he was seeing one of the each weekend, he met each about once a year. Unless, of course, he was mixing it up with most of them every weekend.
Which one is it?
36
@DM Excellent comment! the letter with 65 women supporters does not add up.
And I'd like to hear more about the 100 Keg Club- perhaps a classy, principled group for training future jurists.
12
@DM...I'm wondering how someone found and got 65 women to sign a letter virtually overnight.
1
It is important to remember that this is not a criminal trial. There is no "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard by which her accusations should be judged. Kavanaugh has no right to a spot on the Supreme Court, and questions about his character should be resolved, as has been said, to protect the integrity of the Court, and not his own personal ambition.
On a more granular level: I'm curious about his flat-out denial of having been at "that party" when the location of the party was not mentioned by Professor Ford?
146
@ejs3737 Kavanaugh's statement reads as "he was not at a party like the one [Ford] describes"
In a recent Washington Post article about Kavanaugh ("The Elite World of Brett Kavanaugh" 7/11/18), Kanavanugh was described as a regular at Georgetown bars The Third Edition (featured in the 1985 film "St Elmo's Fire) and Garret's during his Georgetown Prep days. In addition, Kavanaugh wrote in his Georgetown Prep yearbook that he was the treasurer of the "Keg City Club - 100 Kegs or Bust" and also referred to "The Beach Week Ralph Club" and "Rehobeth Police Fan Club."
If I wanted to know more about Brett Kavanaugh, I'd talk to the Rehobeth Beach Police and also to Georgetown Prep boys who summered at Rehobeth Beach during those years. Brett Kavanaugh's mother was a prosecutor at the time Kavanaugh was accused of this assault - Brett Kavanaugh may have felt that his mother being a prosecutor and his family's wealth and influence protected him from drunken teenage boy 'escapades' that would have had more dire consequences for a teenage boy without his privileged background.
198
@fast/furious
Your last paragraph is a fitting description of the Lion of the Senate, Ted Kennedy. And he was an adult at the time of Mary Jo's death. And a Senator later.
Why does he get a pass?
1
A similar experience happened to me as a young woman. I blamed myself. The man is now a very prominent artist, hailed for his “good values.”
I come from a similar background of rich boys destined to be leaders of the community. This sort of thing happened regularly.
And regularly, we blamed ourselves. Our parents blamed us. It was our responsibility to hold them at bay, to stay home or to have avoided a certain party.
Frat houses are filled with these stories and worse still.
I am very grateful to Christine Blasey Ford for coming forward.
I’m tired of seeing these types of boys become the men who make decisions about our lives and those of our daughters. The hypocrisy is outrageous.
Because even if they have changed their ways and become men who today wouldn’t think of doing such a thing, those silent moments stay strong in their own minds. They know it. And it has an effect on the way they judge the world.
They are either master or slave of their own former selves, but they are not neutral. They cannot be neutral. I strongly believe this.
In this case, aside from whether or not he is lying, it is important to dig into his own mind and see if his judgement is affected.
I have a strong feeling it is.
And I, like other women, have had enough. Enough.
522
That is an extremely powerful and moving assessment!
39
@Jane L
"Because even if they have changed their ways and become men who today wouldn’t think of doing such a thing, those silent moments stay strong in their own minds. They know it. And it has an effect on the way they judge the world."
So well stated.
So many of these men stay silent when it comes teaching their sons to respect women.
1
@David Bresch MD I agree!
This editorial has brought up so many good points that should be heeded. First, there needs to be an investigation by the FBI BEFORE a hearing. Without facts, and witnesses, it will become a "she said, he said" theatrical game perpetrated mainly by the Republicans on the judiciary committee. And of course every reason will be found to support Kavanaugh, their guy who hemmed and hawed and evaded so artfully last week. I do not trust him, at all. But I do Dr Blasey. After learning her story in full, I as a woman can empathize with her. I felt her story, so many of us women have lived her story.
I also cannot help but remember Anita Hill. I always believed her. But what did we get from her humiliation and honesty? Clarence Thomas, whom I feel will go down as one of our worst SC justices in recent history. Ms Hill was a sacrificial lamb. And by darn, it can not happen again. Dr. Blasey WILL NOT be put on that misogynistic, vile altar by way of men who are a disgrace to my and all my "sisters'" gender. Kavanaugh, if he has a shred of decency, should withdraw as a candidate to what should be sacred, the Supreme Court.
163
@Kathy Lollock
The FBI? Wouldn't you want an investigation by an impartial agency?
If Kavanaugh were an ordinary citizen with a reputation for truthfulness and fair dealing, and if he were being interviewed for a job as an administrative assistant (or even mid-level management), I would be inclined to give him a pass. We’ve all done stupid things before we were 18 years old that we regret later. (Personally, I regret that one hairstyle with the pink ribbons.) And sometimes people don’t remember what they did when they were drunk. (I wouldn’t know personally; I’ve never been drunk.)
But Kavanaugh is not applying for an entry-level job; he’s up for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. I think the standard should be a LITTLE HIGHER for that. I know my senators will vote against Kavanaugh; I hope they are joined by others, and that Kavanaugh doesn’t make it on the Supreme Court.
109
Why are you saying “you’d give him a pass”? It seems that you and most commentators are accepting as totally factual what has not been proven. I’m also interested in how most commentators also focus on Kavanaugh attending an “elite”all-boy prep school. So did his accuser. She attended an equally elite all-girls prep school. Nobody seems to focus on that - and it shouldn’t matter in any case. I think people these days just like to focus on whatever details are politically-attractive to their own personal views. That is wrong on both the left and the right.
1
Agree...however we allowed a know-nothing adulterer to win in 2016. It’s time for all voters to look in the mirror and ask, is this really the best we can do?
1
More of Trump's "best people, I know the best people." If so, I'm not wrong to believe there are no good Republican men left.
69
@JR
Trump describes him, specifically, as "a very fine person". Where have we heard that before?
2
I understand that article title is a play on #MeToo but when I read it I thought more about "Et tu Brutus". We shall see whether Kavanugh not withdrawing from SCOTUS consideration will be the final stab in the back to Trump.
12
I see Kavanaugh and Pence as cut from the same cloth. And scary.
126
@Truthiness I agree. Very scary. I keep asking my friends who want to see Trump removed from office: do you really want Pence as the President?
2
For those who would say this happened a long time ago, he was not yet an adult, this stuff happens.
Fine.
But what he's doing as an adult counts - and it looks like he is lying on this.
It also appears his testimony on previous occasions was also filled with lies. There are those unexplained debts, and that unexplained payment. There are all those records Republicans are sitting on.
Mr. Kavanaugh should withdraw himself. He is not someone with the integrity to have a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
176
@Larry Roth Exactly. The evidence is strong that Kavanaugh has repeatedly lied under oath, first to get on the federal bench, and now to get on the Supreme Court. The Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have done all they could to prevent a genuine investigation into this man's record (proving once more how utterly bereft of decency, ethics and honour the GOP is).
What kind of man happens top have 65 affidavits from women saying he did NOT try to rape them? Seriously? Why would anyone think this might be needed, say, one day after a woman who says he did try to rape her goes public? You know, just in case?
That stinks even more than the country and the Senate being asked to give this man a lifetime seat on the Court while all but a fraction of his record is being deliberately withheld by the President's Senate lackeys.
Sorry, but if you want to make decisions that will have a direct and immediate impact on the lives of all Americans (not least the 50.8% who are female), we are not just going to believe that you are a combination of St Francis and John Marshall just because you say so.
And certainly not because the pathological liar who is President and his Senate boot-lickers say so.
NO vote until ALL of Kavanaugh's records are released and the ENTIRE committee has studied them AND the FBI has conducted a thorough investigation into this accusation.
If the GOP can wait almost a year to steal a SCOTUS seat, it can wait a few months to seat this guy.
1
I have to admit, I have no reason to believe one way or the other. If this happened, it did so many years ago, there is no corroborating evidence, and it remains a "he said, she said".
I'm not thrilled about Trump packing the Court and I can easily dismiss anything he says on the subject as he's demonstrated a contempt for facts. And I'm also not thrilled with Kavanaugh, who's danced around his positions in the hearings.
I can also appreciate the risks that Dr. Blasey faces by coming out about this. But I also don't know anything about her.
It doesn't add up to proof, based on what I've so far read. The polygraph only confirms that she believes what she's saying.
I do believe that the only reason the vote is being delayed is a calculated attempt to avoid further erosion of the GOP's stranglehold on the country this coming November by making a pretense of appearing principled. Principle hasn't entered into their actions so far.
25
If Kavanaugh categorically denies being at the party then he remembers the party. He is following the Trump lead in a male-superior posture and a "deny, deny, deny" response to an apparently credible charge. Have we progressed at all since Clarence Thomas?
80
@Frank Brett Kavanaugh says that he never went to a party like that in his school days. He said that he never met Christine Ford and knows nothing about her. If he is telling the truth, what else could he say but deny?
And how can you tell whether or not a charge is credible? Even trained investigators have been tested and found not to be able to tell whether the people they are interviewing are lying or not. There's simply no way to tell.
If Mark Judge or the two others who were named by Christine Ford as being at the party were to testify under oath that Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Ford were also there, that may tell us something. Hearing from Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Ford next Monday will (likely) not.
14
So since we can’t know for sure one way or the other, it would seem prudent to err on the side of caution and force Kavanaugh to withdraw. If we get a mini-replay of Anita Hill on Monday and he gets approved, it’s going to have a big effect on the mid-terms. Republicans should wise up.
42
@Frank
He denied being at the party even though the details of where and when it was held had not been revealed at that point.
I understand that he has now corrected that statement to say that he does not recall being at the party.
17
It will be a question of who gets the benefit of the doubt. Roy Moore and most conventionally heterosexual men will give it to Kavanaugh and dismiss the event as a frisky but inconsequential adolescent caper, fun with the guys unfairly magnified by an emotional female. Women and some men will believe the woman who, as everyone understands, has nothing to gain and much to lose by going public now. Kavanaugh, who was surely drunk at the time, can plausibly claim no memory of the encounter. But his blanket denial is dangerous for him because any credible corroborating evidence placing him at the scene risks unraveling the entire fabric of his story.
The nub of the matter will be whether the MeToo sensibility has deeply penetrated the minds of two moderate Republican women senators, Collins and Murkowski. My guess is that it hasn't, and if Kavanaugh gives a sympathetic performance they won't bolt. Collins and Murkowski are sensitive to being Republican outliers and will stay in line unless Kavanaugh self-destructs. Nobody is asking Joni Ernst whether she is troubled by any of this.
But however it ends up, the Blasey Ford disclosure is not a good development for Republicans. If Kavanaugh is rejected, the opportunity for a quick Supreme Court confirmation has been lost. If he is confirmed despite the sexual assault allegations, more fuel has been heaped on the midterm election bonfire.
50
@woofer A good point. If he's confirmed despite the allegations, it doesn't exactly make the GOP look good.
I can't shake the inescapable feeling of witnessing another slow-motion trainwreck, just as we did in 1991.
Nothing about this Senate committee makes me believe this special hearing on Monday will be anything more, or handled any better, than the circus of humiliation and tragedy that the Hill-Thomas hearings were in 1991. The GOP members of the current committee are even more clueless than Joe Biden and the Dems were then, if that is possible. The optics of the GOP males on the committee, interrogating Dr. Blasey Ford in 2018 with the same ham-fisted clumsiness that was exhibited 27 years ago will be excruciating. And, just as then, a woman will come forward against all odds, risking her reputation and privacy, to confront the inherently biased, unfair power structure of this country, and possibly lose, once again.
That may, or may not be as great a tragedy as having a Thomas, or a Kavanaugh, on the Supreme Court, but it makes the whole thing harder to watch. The GOP has indulged in the open theft of a SC seat, but not before allowing the seat to go empty for months, then jettisoning the SC filibuster, to get it done. Their shabby stewardship is what has brought the Court to the brink of disaster, in terms of reputation.
128
@SSS Obama's pick, Judge Garland, NOT receiving any senate consideration made the the SC a pathetic partisan joke in the mind of this citizen. We've fallen so far.
1
Robert Mueller’s investigation has made an imprint in the ways things are now done in Washington.
The broom and dustpan have been sequestered, and finally investigations are thorough and comprehensive.
This is the first time that I can recall during Trump’s tenure where he may not reign.
18
As noted, Mark Judge's memoir, "Wasted," includes a character, Bart O’Kavanaugh, "described as drinking to excess." If there is any doubt about the use of O'Kavanaugh for Kavanaugh, the choice of "Bart" for "Brett" removes it. It obviously derives from the television western that alternated episodes between two characters, the brothers Bart and Brett Maverick.
50
@Polaris
I think "Bart" is just as likely a tribute to bratty troublemaker and prankster Bart Simpson, from the show "The Simpsons" that premiered in 1987, a decade before Mark Judge wrote his memoir of what bad boy troublemakers he and Kavanaugh were in high school. "The Simpsons," as we all know, is still on tv now.
They both may be right. She recalls an assault by Mr. Kavanaugh and has passed a polygraph test. He says he never did anything like this and she must be mistaking him for someone else, and he will shout that from the Senate floor on Monday. But, so far, he is not offering to take a polygraph. His backup also has changed his story, but he too doesn't suggest a polygraph. What I really want to know - is he lying.
Did he get so drunk he did something totally out of character that it never happened again. but he remembers it and is lying, or was he so drunk he did it and doesn't even remember it at all?
A polygraph isn't perfect or admissible in court, but it's something besides two people swearing they are telling the truth. Without at least trying to figure out what happened based on something other than oaths, Justice Kavanaugh will be never be considered fair, just, or honest by a large percentage of Americans (most of them with ovaries).
86
@Kathleen There is a good reason that polygraphs are not acceptable in court. They have been found to be unreliable.
You discount the possibility that Brett Kavanaugh is innocent. Indeed, you dismiss it. But in my experience, that is the most likely possibility, though certainly not certain. (I have been an attorney for 30 years and have seen a lot of cases where testimony conflicted.)
We see the same kind of thing with Donald Trump as we see with Brett Kavanaugh. Many people believe very strongly that Donald Trump illegally colluded with Russians and that Robert Mueller will find evidence to prove that. Even though no one has found a shred of evidence to support that. Somehow they know it in their hearts.
People who know that Christine Ford is telling the truth ought to ask themselves how they could know that simply by reading what is in the media. Do they really think they have some magical power to tell truth from lies?
22
@John Smithson, I think you misunderstood the editorial. It calls for a thorough investigation of the allegations by the FBI before Judiciary Committee hearings. That sounds pretty reasonable, especially for a candidate for the Supreme Court.
Ford has given us no reason to deny her truthfulness. On the contrary, she's taken a polygraph and shared private conversations with her therapist. There is no upside for her in coming forward.
Kavanaugh, on the other hand, may have committed perjury in his confirmation hearings to become a circuit judge, and he's been evasive and misleading in these hearings. He seems to have had a problem with large debts and to have received stolen Democratic emails from a GOP operative and lied about it. And we still don't know what counsel he offered Bush on warrantless wiretapping or torture.
You have to consider the character of the person you're defending--and that goes for Trump as well.
6
@Kathleen
I am wondering if he doesn't remember assaulting her also, or has a very vague memory of the incident. If he was indeed highly intoxicated, it's possible he doesn't recall.
Either way, the fact that he has not offered to submit to a polygraph test, while not something that should necessarily be considered damning, is not reassuring.
1
I remember the televised hearings at which Anita Hill was shamed, scarlet-lettered and shown almost no respect at the Clarence Thomas hearings. Perhaps it was Judge Thomas's "high-tech lynching" that cleared the way for his 52-vote.
It was an appalling lack of justice from those who claimed to be conservative but, when the test came, looked the other way. Republicans wanted another hard-right ideologue on the bench and, race aside, were quite content to disparage a black woman with credible accusations of sexual harassment against a former boss.
Christine Blasey Ford will, perhaps, face the same sort hasty dismissal next week in the august chamber of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Already the slings and arrows and darts have been launched at her. Fox News and Clear Channel have, predictably, led the assault upon Ms. Blasey's character.
While the outlines of the alleged incident need to be filled in, the heart of the matter is what happened in that dark room, the music blasting, and two boys, deeply in their cups, having wrestled a resisting young girl onto a bed. One of them watched while the other went at the girl with his body. If these facts are in dispute, this is the last venue. Forever.
In the meantime, it is time for American women to cease being on the defensive, especially when their very selves are the objects of attack. Their bodies are mauled and their psyches are ruined. This has to stop.
Republicans must bear up this time, no matter the outcome.
120
I've been an attorney for nearly forty years. I tried dozens of cases, and I understand issues of evidence and witness credibility.
In this case, the vast weight of the evidence supports Prof. Blasey. She spoke of the incident many years back to her therapist, and a contemporaneous record was made. She has provided specific details of the assault, naming Kavanaugh then. She has passed a lie detector test administered by a former FBI agent.
And on Kavanaugh's behalf, other than his boilerplate denial, we have absolutely nothing. No lie detector test to back him up, and he most certainly will not agree to take one.
So this is far more than a he said/she said situation. It is a she said case, with all the evidence supporting her claim, and none supporting his.
All Kavanaugh and his toadies can do is besmirch her character, and drag her through the mud next week at the hearing. This is what substitutes for proof from their side.
And understand this. We are not in a criminal court where the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, as against the accused. Kavanaugh has absolutely no "right" to a Supreme Court seat. If the preponderance of the evidence favors Prof. Blasely's claim (and so far, it does), then Kavanaugh should not be seated.
All this said, with the Republican Congress we have now, the vote to confirm him will be railroaded through, and he will be seated. And when that happens, no woman will ever again feel as if she may speak out on a charge like this.
498
@Donegal What evidence? An accusation is not evidence in any state in the US. If this was brought before a district attorney today would he prosecute? We have a 35 year old case. No physical evidence. The accuser doesn't remember the exact date of the allege attack. The defendant & his friend deny the charges. No witnesses, the parties were minors & drunk. The defendant has never been charged with a similar crime. Based on the evidence would a prosecuting attorney bring this to a jury. Absolutely not. We all know that. It's an unwinnable case based on the facts & statute of limitations. Many of the comments here automatically assume Kavanaugh is guilty. Do we still believe one is innocent until proven guilty? No we don't anymore. The burden of proof has shifted. Many political agendas out there on both sides of this. Abortion, immigration, women's rights, guns. Exploiting unproven accusations to forward your own political self interest is deplorable. You know it, and so do others. He may be innocent, and he may not be. She may be innocent, and she may not be. But there's absolutely no way we will ever get to the truth in a one day hearing...lets all at least admit that much. This is political theater. Knowing that lets also admit this has the air of a political vendetta....what really happened will be an unintended casualty. I happen to think Kavanaugh should withdraw. But this isn't over. The GOP will retaliate with a similar accusation against a Democrat. What then?
23
@Donegal
I can match your experience and will bet I've tried more cases. I'm very familiar with polygraphs. I would never advise a client to take one because they're worthless and not admissible in a court of law. They're an investigative tool useful for what might be said during the interview but not to prove one is telling the truth or lying. Sadly, here, accuser and accused will be judged by an inflamed court of public opinion. I have little hope truth will prevail.
17
I agree with everything in your post, except your last point. I believe there will be more women brave enough to speak out against abusers, especially when stakes are so high and the consequences matter as they are and do here. Christine Blasey Ford is another in a long list of women willing to put the truth before themselves for the sake of something higher but she - sadly, and also not sadly - won’t be the last.
13
Note that Judge Kavanaugh says he wasn’t at the party ... but the victim does not recall what house the party was at. Does he claim never to have been at any party?
138
@John Graubard Good point. And how in the world did Kavanaugh have 65 letters at the drop of a hat from women he knew in high school saying what a great guy he was?
There is no pattern of behavior in K’s life that would lend credence to the claim. Every peer and subordinate, male and female,for his entire professional life, except the accuser, vouch for his character and integrity - every one. Even if K is confirmed, this accusation will follow him forever.
That is a sad, sad comment on where we are politically as a country. There are no boundaries, and pundits wonder why good people have no interest in entering politics? Here’s your answer.
22
The classic male response, "what about his future?" I beg you to answer the question, what about her future? She suffers from anxiety and PTSD. She is being demeaned and shamed for her reality. She suffers, and he doesn't deserve a free pass. She deserves to be believed, and he can prove that he is innocent. So far, he has not. He has proven to have a history of alcohol abuse as a minor. He may very well not remember his actions, but that does not mean he did not do them.
3
@Richven
Have you read his yearbook page?
Hardly a sober clean-living young man emerges from that. Warning: one does need to consult an urban dictionary for some of the words and terms used.
2
I sincerely hope that this issue, which has (unfortunately) come forth at the last minute, is resolved giving the accuser a lot more respect than Anita Hill received many years ago. IF the accusations however become a thrown-together piece of political theater, the Democrats are going to have a VERY tough battle in November. So she had BETTER be 100% truthful with her story. To ME, Kavanaugh has always had a smirk on his face as if he already knows that "I'm going to get nominated 'cause McConnell told me that the bad stuff is going to be kept locked away". And there appears to be a lot of sensitive material the committee is not being allowed to review. So even without S-E-X, he's already lied in prior testimony, and his writings are already disturbingly extreme. His treatment of denying an immigrant detainee the right to an abortion is ALREADY inexcusable. The word "judge" when I look at his face and hear about his record seems surreal. So maybe this seems cruel, but I HOPE he held Dr.Ford down with the intention of hurting her severely, so she would stop struggling
(perhaps unable to breathe) and continue to do whatever he wanted for as long as he wanted. In any case, we don't need someone on the court that, like C.Thomas, doesn't care about protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. You know how he will rule ALREADY on important cases, and ESPECIALLY on the issue of removing DJT from office.
But November 11 is "D (as in Democrat) DAY."
21
What sexual offenses are about is an attitude and conduct that speak of disrespect, abuse and misogyny. There must be proof of a deep-seated character flaw that renders the offender untrustworthy. A single long-ago incident that, even in the worst case scenario, involved no intimacy beyond "second base" is an isolated, moderately serious first offense that, if pursued, might have resulted in the imposition of six months probation. If it speaks to Kanaugh's character, let's hear the rest of the adverse character witnesses. Standing alone, it simply is not emblematic of an abusive personality.
Anita Hill charged a pattern of conduct and she was corroborated by a number of other women. Absent additional allegations, Ms. Ford has alleged serious offense against her. But it simply is insufficient to brand Kavanguh as a menace to women.
18
I don’t agree with the test being whether a prosecutor would press charges today given the evidence. I can tell you that this type of behavior would not have passed muster when and where I was a teenager; drinking was legal at 16, but getting drunk was not acceptable; intimidation and coercion were never accepted nor excused, certainly not in the context of physical or romantic relationship.
I think we can aim higher than settling for someone whose teenage years seemingly had some drinking excess in them but who, so far, has not revealed how he has grown beyond that behavior, other than not recalling it. There is redemption, atonement and personal growth. From the person who will judge our lives circumstances, I want to know about their process before I can take them seriously.
19
@michjas
@michjas
A 15-year old girl had two older boys grab her in a hallway and forcibly drag her into a bedroom. One of them then threw her on the bed, got on top of her and groped her and tried to remove her clothes as she struggled, and held his hand over her mouth as she tried to screeam for help. Decades later she was still in therapy trying to recover from the trauma of this terrifiying incident that was likely one of her earliest sexual experiences, thereby forming the basis for her future relationship to her sexuality.
In my book this is a very serious incident. And as a sexual assault survivor who endured a very similar attack at a similiar age, I can affirm that it takes decades to recover from a trauma like this.
That people continue to minimize sexual assuals such as these, especially on young girls, shows just how far we as a society still have to go.
4
@michjas
A 15-year old girl had two older boys grab her in a hallway and forcibly drag her into a bedroom. One of them then threw her on the bed, got on top of her and groped her and tried to remove her clothes as she struggled, and held his hand over her mouth as she tried to screeam for help. Decades later she was still in therapy trying to recover from the trauma of this terrifiying incident that was likely one of her earliest sexual experiences, thereby forming the basis for her future relationship to her sexuality.
In my book this is a very serious incident. And as a sexual assault survivor who endured a very similair attack at a similiar age, I can affirm that it takes decades to recover from a trauma like this.
That people continue to minimize sexual assuals such as this, especially on young girls, shows just how far we as a society still have to go.
4
What with Thomas, and now (presumably) Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, only three more appointments and the Republicans will have the Supreme Court they want, an iron-clad assembly dominated by misogynists. And if Trump can get re-elected in 2020, that's a guaranteed outcome.
27
And to think Merrick Garland, in the estimation of these same fine Republican Senators, didn't even qualify for a hearing.
384
@JEB I wish I could recommend this 10000 times !
2
If he’s confirmed, there’s a judicial objective to be accomplished. Whenever Democrats retake the House and Senate: Impeach Kavanaugh and oust him from the bench.
37
I believe given time, more parties are likely to come forward. This should not be hurried.
64
I believe one day, sooner than we think, Democrats will regret this decision. Republicans live by the motto what is done to thou will be done to thee times 10. The next time a 35 year old accusation comes to light it will be directed at a Democrat. Count on it. Whether they know it or not the Democrats are introducing a new litmus test on their ability to serve? Because if Kavanaugh is forced to withdraw then the GOP will demand that Democratic politicians be forced to resign if similar allegations come to light? An they will. Whether Kavanaugh steps down or not a conservative jurist will serve on SCOTUS nothing can stop that. Isn't the real issue Kavanaugh is a conservative who could change the direction of the court so we are willing to set aside our principles temporarily? It would seem so. I have to wonder if Kavanaugh was a liberal who would swing the court to the left would we have as many comments here asking him to step down. Probably not. Wouldn't we & NYT be more outraged at the last minute accusation. If we set this terrible precedent we're asking for a non stop witch hunt where the innocent & guilty are indistinguishable. We shouldn't do this because of political expediency where a mere accusation can destroy someone's career. The reason we have statutes of limitations is not because of the inability of obtaining a conviction after many years, but the practicality of defending ones innocence. I doubt this one will ever be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
29
@Bill Brown
So you feel the only reason this episode from long ago should never have seen the light of day is because of political ramifications and what effect it might have on future actions? What about truth and honesty? What about a core base of decency that we all start from--not dependent on a party affiliation? No, the innocent and the guilty are discernible if time is taken to investigate and listen and question. Isn't that what jurists do? This is not a mere accusation. This is an experience that seared this woman for many years, and regardless of the outcome, it is right that her voice is finally heard.
102
@Skol If this was brought before a district attorney today would he prosecute? We have a 35 year old case. No physical evidence. The accuser doesn't remember the exact date of the alleged attack. The defendant & his friend deny the charges. No witnesses, the parties were minors & drunk. The defendant has never been charged with a similar crime. Based on the evidence would a prosecuting attorney bring this to a jury. No. We all know that. It's an unwinnable case based on the facts & statute of limitations. What bothers me is that many of the comments here automatically assume Kavanaugh is lying, automatically assume he is guilty. Based on what? Do we still believe one is innocent until proven guilty? No we don't anymore. The burden of proof has shifted. Many political agendas out there on both sides of this. Abortion, immigration, women's rights, men's rights. Exploiting unproven accusations to forward your own political self interest is deplorable. You know it, and so do others. He may be innocent, and he may not be. She may be innocent, and she may not be. But there's absolutely no way we will ever get to the truth in a one day hearing...lets all at least admit that much. This is political theater. Knowing that lets also admit this has the air of a political vendetta....what really happened will be an unintended casualty. I happen to think Kavanaugh should withdraw. But this isn't over. The GOP will retaliate with a similar accusation against a Democrat. What then?
3
@Bill Brown
Dem’s asked Al Franklin to resign his Senate seat which he did. It may have only been less than 15 years ago from his accusers but your right this will come back on the next set of politicians
6
To me, the critical part of the history is that she reported the assault 6 years ago, long before Kavanaugh was being considered for a SCOTUS nomination, to her therapist. There was no possible secondary gain in 2012. This lends a degree of versimilitude to her claims that is hard to deny.
194
How do we know that she reported the 'assault' six years ago? Do we even know the name of the therapist? Did the therapist collaborate this discussion? Have we seen the therapist's notes? Did she specifically name her 'attackers' six years ago? Did she also report other 'assault' incidents as well, with specific names of the perpetrators?
Etc. etc.
Also, why did she wait till now to bring this up? Could it be a measure of last resort?
We all know how this will play out. What a waste of time, money and effort for everyone. The only ones who benefit are the media, of course.
13
@lrubin
I agree but short of a great deal of psychological test knowledge, I am not sure how this could be done reliably. I assume some Senators will dig, and we have to each make our own best quess.
Is the Supreme Court about to be exposed for what it has become . . . a vetting agency for a political party, with its members' integrity tied in lock-step to that party's agenda?
26
“The charge is too old,” is often used in a dismissive way, as if to imply that the statute of limitations – to make the charge stick or seem credible – had passed. But here’s the rub – what if the charge was attempted murder? It’s likely the person, who did try to commit that heinous crime decades before, has turned his or her life around since then. Nonetheless, the question of justice for the victim has not been resolved all these years later.
So that’s what’s at stake here. The “old charge” in this case is of attempted rape and regardless of the circumstances in which this charge surfaced, it needs to be heard. It’s not even being pursued in a court of law (which it could be in Maryland, where the alleged incident occurred, and where it appears that there is no statute of limitations for sexual assault), but in the court of public opinion. Thankfully, the Senate is holding a public hearing so that the American public gets to hear both sides and also ensures that due process is being followed.
More importantly, what’s at stake is a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. We simply cannot appoint yet another justice, accused of sexual misconduct, to the Supreme Court without giving the victim a proper opportunity to make her case and the accused a chance to defend himself. Even if it does not change minds, at least Senators will be able to vote on the nominee in an informed manner.
33
Kavanaugh's ability to flatly deny the allegations are dubious at best. Blasely states that both Kavanaugh and friend were drunk. Presumably Kavanaugh and friend were similarly intoxicated. Friend doesn't remember - plausible. Based on probability that Kavanaugh was intoxicated then and more than once in his life the best case scenario for him is he can't remember if he did or didn't.
Then again Sessions couldn't remember a lot of things material to his career even when he wasn't drunk and it didn't seem to affect his appointment.
59
Historically, for women to speak up about assault has been to receive, at best, no reaction. There is only a downside to speaking out--which is why speaking out takes immense courage.
185
When does a Supreme Court confirmation hearing turn into a Circuit Court impeachment hearing?
If Dr. Blasey is credible, we should find out Monday.
19
Judge Kavanaugh should be very worried when Mr. Trump is the one providing him with "character reference". He should remember that Mr. Trump is accused of exactly the type of behavior of which he is accused by more than a dozen women.
To do it right, there should be no vote on Judge Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court, until the new accusation is thoroughly investigated by FBI. To start with, Dr. Blasey, Judge Kavanaugh, and his high school friend, all should undergo lie detection tests.
72
"Deny, deny, deny" didn't start during the age of Trump. It's a well known lawyer's phrase they tell their clients. NY Times please be accurate for a change. Slanting things to bolster your views makes not a great newspaper, it just turns you into a sleazy tabloid.
21
@lou andrews "deny, deny, deny" is actually a punchline of the late, great Lenny Bruce.
Even if the accusation is credible there is no way to adjudicate it. You cannot legitimately get to a reasonable belief on these facts, with these three witnesses, at this remove of time, with no other contemporary corroboration, given what we all now know, no matter the standard of proof. Believing her isn't enough. Nor is this remotely the proper forum. It will doubtless be entertaining nevertheless.
22
@Frunobulax...
Given the victim's credibility... this is precisely the proper forum.
Given the perpetrator's determination to suppress Women's Right's... this is profoundly the proper forum.
1
Why would they have positive reviews from 65 women all ready to go? Why? What triggered the need for them?
138
This is not his first confirmation hearing
I am sure they had much done starting back in 2003 when he was first passed through the Senate almost unanimously
6
@DM
Indeed, and Kenneth Starr even said that these 65 women all knew him from high school.
And that while Georgetown Prep. was a catholic all boys school.
@DM I don't think these were ready to go as you negatively imply. I think they were solicited AFTER this news story broke. If anything it shows that many people had a very positive recollection of him at that time in his life and they were easily reachable and contactable in this day and age.
1
How about including Trumpty Dumpty in the hearing so he can tell us about his macho escapades with all those women? He should be heard like he said about Kavanaugh. So sad that they get away with all these horrific acts.
12
So how did the Democrats acquit themselves during the initial hearing with Judge Kavanaugh already? Senator Harris went on a fishing expedition for malfeasance for which she had no basis. Booker made a circus of his faux-Spartacus moment for documents that had already been released and his Senate career was never in jeopardy.
17
Kavanaugh lied about seeing info from the stolen Senate Democratic memos and I'm sure other things. I think he will lie about the sexual assault as well. In the era of Trump it appears "under oath" means nothing to these people, even those who want to be a supreme court justice. If getting what they want involves lying, they will absolutely lie. Shame on Kavanaugh. And all the rest of them. Disgusting.
204
@Anonymous
Yup. Having watched the hearings, I think it is clear he is not flamingly stupid. And that is the only other reasonable explanation for his treatment of the memos. I had hoped someone would ask him if he used a ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ approach, just to spare him the otherwise ‘dumb as a post’ implication.
Thus, a liar.
1
I think you should be more careful with your phrasing. To say there is no upside to coming forward is to try to derail the entire MeToo movement. Certainly it is difficult to come forward and may lead to negative consequences, but I know women who have come forward and have been thankful to be part of something that is for the greater good, creating space and safety for other women in the same situation, even considering the cost. There are also personal motivations that might make it worthwhile, such as seeing justice done. Given the gravity of a supreme court seat, especially this specific seat at this time, it would not be unreasonable for a cynic to think that someone would be willing to bear the stigma attached to being a victim of sexual abuse if it might lead to major changes in society one would like to see.
As far as the timing, I'm not saying Senator Feinstein did this on purpose, but the timing is much more consistent with the cynical view than you give it credit for. Come out with accusations too early and President Trump goes to the next name on the list. Now it's too late for that.
I definitely think this needs to be investigated and I'll not make any assumptions about the accuser, just trying to keep the Times honest.
16
If Kavanaugh were nominated by Obama for the " advice and consent " of a Democratic senate and was a fervent pro - choice supporter would this allegation of teenage sexual assault have emerged?
13
Emerged when? He never would have been given a confirmation hearing.
Yes. I’m referring to Garland.
52
Yes, and his nomination would have been withdrawn already. Remember Senator Al Franken?
68
@BD The point is that President Obama would not have nominated Kavanaugh.
23
There needs to be a full FBI investigation before the senate holds another hearing. Otherwise, it's still rush rush rush and an attempt to hold their vote no matter what.
91
This is not something the FBI would investigate even if true
The FBI investigates federal crimes
At the end of the process there is not likely to be a definitive conclusion.She says. He says. As a teenager did Kavanaugh sexually assault the complainant? If there is uncertainty in this matter as is likely does Kavanaugh get a pass? A very tough question. Under these circumstances in my view he should not be rejected for appointment to SCOTUS.
15
@Milton Lewis I believe that anyone under consideration for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land should have an impeccable character. I do not think that is possible for Kavanaugh now.
123
@Milton Lewis. No one has a right to an appointment to the Supreme Court. If there's any doubt about a nominee's qualifications, intellectual or personal, he or she should be rejected.
27
@Bev. I must admit that I am really not sure about the correct resolution. If Judge K.does not take a lie detector test And pass it I would change my view. I very much appreciate your thoughful comment.
Does anyone other than me remember one of the early stories (I think, in the Washington Post) that quoted a local DC bartender about how Kavanaugh was a regular at the establishment and such a nice guy? At the time of reading, I noted that he was a regular bar patron and then moved on. Now, at the very least, I think he still may have a drinking problem. Not good for a Supreme Court justice.
190
@LIly-If not a drinking problem a debting problem. In 2016, Kavanaugh reported having between $60,000 and $200,000 in debt accrued over three credit cards and a loan. How did his debt get magically paid and who paid it?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/supreme-court-nominee-bret...
130
@LIly
Mark Judge's book, "Wasted", he talks about drunken escapades and includes a character who he calls Bart O'Kavanaugh.
1
@Ann
He also is known to have had a gambling problem. But heck, his popier-than-the-pope piousness is manna from heaven for all Evangelicals.
The defenders of Kavanaugh are saying that he never was a binge drinker when he was a young man. This may in fact be true.
So if this night was an extreme exception to his normal behavior (the drinking, not the assault), he might just remember being so intoxicated all these years later.
Even if he does not have a clear memory of the alleged assault, but recalls his unusual night of drinking, he could be lying to the Senate now.
If Kavanaugh is willing to blatantly lie to the Senate to get this appointment, then his true character is exposed.
138
@S.R.
Kavanaugh's high school year book page shows clearly that he was a binge drinker. So his defenders either did not know him well or are lying.
3
Trump's words to the effect that Kavanaugh is amongst the best people he ever knew places his nominee for SCOTUS firmly in the company of Manafort, Cohen, Flynn, Porter, etc, etc, etc. and seriously raises the question in this reader's mind how soon before Kavanaugh is looking at an entirely different kind of court appointment.
153
@Leigh
" I will hire only the best people..."
1
I believe her. I was assaulted in high school. I did speak up and received the support of my family and principal; unfortunately I was also blamed as the victim and many people, including the guys parents, asked me to forgive him and let it go because he was “just a kid.” Girls are rarely believed. I’m grateful that I had my parents support who advocated for my safety and some sort of justice. My hope at the time and still today is that that behavior was never repeated and that he became a better person. Kavanaugh is supposed to represent our highest ideals and ethics if he were appointed to the Supreme Court. If these allegations are valid (and I believe they are) they raise very troubling questions around his suitability as a nominee.
327
@Amanda
Exactly.
He was a heavy drinker then, his buddy outed him.
Thus he never confronted that drinking and what he did while drunk.
He surely never made amends to Ms Blasey which would have helped her and firmly placed this incident in the past.
What dams him is that she has told the story about the assault for 16 years according to reports.
25
@Amanda Thanks for sharing your real-life experience. It helps me on such a deep level. As does Christine Ford's coming forward to tell her story. This is a lot of progress. #MeToo
16
@Amanda
There are way too many questions about Kavanaugh's suitability...all centering around his veracity. That alone disqualifies him.
Kavanaugh should absolutely NOT be honored and rewarded with a LIFETIME appointment to the most revered judicial position...the United States Supreme Court.
There are many other deserving candidates with stellar records, why pick Kavanaugh about whom so many have serious doubts.
1
I would wager that if you could accurately read the minds of the Republican Senators who will ultimately hold the power to confirm or deny the Kavanaugh nomination, you would find that all of them know that they are going to still vote “yes”. Orin Hatch even publicly admitted that having Dr. Ford and Mr. Kavanaugh appear Monday and sit for questions before the Judiciary Committee under oath would not change his plan to vote in favor of the nominee. This white, male fraternity, that is the set of Republican members of the committee, already knows that the nomination will be forwarded to the full Senate body for a vote, and that we will find that the whole process has been a waste of time. Our only recourse is to vote them out of Washington in November.
375
It is very telling that Senator Hatch described the Dr. Ford -- without any special information or psychiatric training -- as a "mixed up woman." In 2018, this is not anything anyone should say about a woman with no information at hand. It is something right out of the 1950s. Women cannot be believed because "you know how they are: too dumb and hysterical to be believed." Senator, have you heard of the MeToo movement? I guess not. Women are just crazy, mixed up creatures who don't know the truth about anything."
1
Where was this claim against Kavanaugh when he passed the Senate with flying colors in 2003 to serve on the second most powerful court? When was the claim against Kavanaugh told to authorities or someone close to her in thirty years? Why did Dianne Feinstein sit on this for months and released only after the confirmation hearings? Why is it that her family court case connection is irrelevant? Why is it by chance this person marched in anti-Trump rallies and is a self described liberal?
Everyone knows this is a delay tactic hail mary attempt. Sure partisans on the left are going to want this to take him down, but they know what this is.
Unless there is corroborating evidence presented on Monday, Kavanaugh will be rightfully seating on SCOTUS. If corroborating evidence is presented on Monday that leads to validity of the claims the next nominee hearings should start Tuesday.
22
@John-Does Judge Kavanaugh have an impeccable record? If so, why has the White House held back over 100,000 documents and redacted information in it released? Why did Republican Senators limit the time their colleagues had to review relevant documents...releasing 42,000 pages ONLY the night before hearings started? Wouldn't Judge Kavanaugh insist that all relevant evidence be brought to light in the cases he presides over? Wouldn't he want to be held to the same standards he would apply? Surely it's worthwhile to allow adequate time for a full review of his record.
267
@John - Was his name in the headlines in 2003? If so I missed it and it's likely that Blasey did as well.
16
@Ann They had time to review them and they have found nothing but a 30+ year old he said she said. The timeline for this nomination is on track with all past nominations. Just because they want to read a lot of worthless documents doesn't mean much.
Sorry your girl lost but Kavanaugh will be OUR new Justice. You are just going to have to live with that.
Me? I am pleased as punch.
If Kavanaugh had any integrity, he'd turn down the nomination and focus on what's important in his life: his family and community service.
Why is he wasting his time and ours?
420
@wihiker: ...and why not just,like Howard
Beale in "Network" threaten to commit
suicide on live television? these are 35
year old ALLEGATIONS. whether one is
for Kavanaugh on the high court or not,
the man has a right to defend himself
from these accusations. with all respect,
as long as I am talking about movie
metaphors,I suggest that you watch
"The Ox Bow Incident."you may actually
learn something about jumping to
conclusions.
2
The status trap. Each capitol and city has many.
He was 17,
We are slowly getting to a place (albeit glacially slow) where we stop treating these incidences as a ''she said - he said moment''.
There is an accusation of one person using their physicality to exert power over another person. Full stop. That is an assault.
Regardless if it happened decades ago, it can still be judged in regards to the character of the accused, even though the law does not apply for criminality.
Questions will be asked and a supposed thorough investigation will occur. There will be political opposites that will want to score their points, but that should not matter in the end.
Judges (especially those on the highest bench) need to be beyond reproach.
303
It is not easy for Ms. Ford to come forward. She is a professor and has everything to lose in revealing this sad event. Her donation to the Democratic party and her party association is nothing compared to what she has to face in front of the public; in particular, her neighbors, her friends, student and her family.
So, it is quite reasonable that Ms. Ford's claim is true. Even if it is not, an investigation should be launched to find out the truth. Washington these days remind me of the feudal system we have back who knows when.
179
@Informed Investor
Excuse me. She hardly "came forward." She leveled her chargesf while demanding annonmyity. Moreover, after launching her little bombshell, she stated that she did not want it to be pursued (or words to that effect.) Why not? Because that would have involved her having to identify herself.
Not lunlike the illegal immigrants whom she supports, who wait until they're caught before deciding that they're really hear to demand asylum, she only "came forward" after the press had determined her identity.
8
@red sox 9 I hope there are no women in your life.
None of us knows exactly what happened, but we do now that Mr. Kavanaugh's main character witness is a person who is in recovery from self-described alcohol and drug abuse, including heavy drinking in high school to the extent that he blacked out.
A person has no "right" to be confirmed to the Supreme Court, and Professor Ford has made credible allegations.
Barring proof that professor Ford has lied, any result other than the withdrawal of this nomination will be bad for the country.
515
@Mark Keller
So his testimony is irrelevant because he often "blacked out". But the accusations of hundreds of millenial girls and women who were so blacked out that they didn't realize they were victims of molestation until the next day, or next year. Can't have it both ways. Frankly, a rational person would be leery of testimony from any drunkard who passed out.
1
@red sox 9
She said she had 1 beer.
@Mark Keller I am against this nomination as well, but you can't possibly mean to say that he is to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise...
It couldn't possibly be true
that Brett such a thing would e'er do
His papers kept hidden
Assault? Are you kiddin'
A POTUS protector, so nu?
114
If you like the Old Boys Club, then Brett Kavanaugh may be your kind of patriarchal guy.
If you like control over your own bodies, ladies, or you have daughters or granddaughters who would like control over their own bodies, then Brett Kavanaugh and some like-minded right-wing Supreme Court justices with a 1787 view of reality would like you to bear the nation's unwanted male sperm to term.
Run for your lives, American women.......to the polls on November 6 2018 and vote for women's rights, not medieval male rights !
623
@Socrates-Indeed Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh both attended the same elite Georgetown Preparatory High School. Moreover, if Kavanaugh makes it to the Supremes, he'll be the sixth justice on board with a Catholic background!
20
@Socrates
Calls, tweets, texts or emails to Collins an Mikursky would also help.
1
@Socrates. And if you live in a state with a republican senator (or a red state with a democratic senator). Call them, e-mail them, let them know how disgusted you are that a man with a credible rape allegation against him is up for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. Pressure works!
1
In deciding how much weight to give Dr Blasey’s claim, as well as Judge Kavanaugh’s denial, the motivations of each party are significant.
Dr Blasey gains nothing personally by her claim, and has much to lose by making it. Judge Kavanaugh has everything to gain by denying it, and much to lose by admitting it.
722
@Kirsten S.
Dr Blasely will become rich. She will get a book deal, probably a movie deal as well as become an instant celebrity. Appearances on all the late night talk shows and coronation as a "hero of the resistance"
She will become rich and famous. She will gain plenty.
3
@Kirsten S.
Many people are guided by self-interest. Many people are guided by conscience. If you know what guides a person, you may know them even better than they know themselves. So how did you gain access to the immutable truth?
1
@Kirsten S.
There is no "decision" involved. She told her husband about it in 2002 w/o naming names. The reason was so he took it easy as they got close. It was affecting her that strongly then. She brought it up again in couples therapy in 2012 naming the perp this time.
There is nothing to decide in the face of the rush, the hidden records, the mendacity in front of the cameras as he testilied for the Senate.
The conclusion is incontrovertible.
read Emma Brown's WaPo article on the subject she makes all the facts clear in one go.