We know for certain that Democrats believe that the charges against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford aren’t credible. Because if Democrats thought the charges were credible they would have sprung them on him on the first day of the hearings in order to make Trump look like a fool. But even if the charges aren’t credible it will take time to debunk them; hence revealing them after the hearings are over buys more time.
We know for certain that Ford is not a good person. Because good people don’t anonymously, but publicly, accuse other people of things like rape. If she was sincere in trying to prevent someone who she honestly thought had assaulted her from being on the Supreme Court without making her claims public then she should have either told Kavanaugh in private to give him a chance to withdraw, or told the Republicans so that they would tell Kavanaugh to withdraw. Instead she intentionally hurt him and his family by making claims that it would be impossible for him to refute.
We know for certain that Ford is a far left anti-Trump person. That’s why her social media were all removedbefore she announced who she was. We know she gave money to leftist politicians.
We know for certain that the holes in Ford’s “memories” are optimally designed to make her accusation uncheckable. The lack of a specific date means that it’s impossible for Kavanaugh to show that he wasn’t at the event in question for example. If Ford specified a date then Kavanaugh could show that he was out of town or that he was at some other event. But without a date Kavanaugh can’t do that since it’s impossible to show that he was never near a house where no parents were present.
We know for certain that Ford has a basis for a personal vendetta against Kavanaugh since his mother ruled against Ford’s parents in a court case. As an aside ask yourself how likely it is that Kavanaugh would assault Ford and then years later her parents would happen to draw his mom as a judge in their case? On the other hand the fact that Kavanaugh's mother ruled against her parents gives Ford a motive to lie.
We know for certain that lie detector tests are not reliable especially when they’re administered by people who are paid by the person being tested. That’s why lie detector results aren’t admissible in court; essentially polygraphs are useful for scaring the person into telling the truth but not useful for actually finding out what the truth is. But if the polygrapher is being paid by Ford he’s hardly likely to be eager to show that Ford is a liar.
We know for certain that the two men who Ford has accused have both categorically denied that anything remotely like what Ford claims to have happened ever happened. This is not a case of “he said she said” but “he said, he said, she said”. This smacks of the Sharia law concept that a woman’s testimony isn’t as significant as a man’s though in this circumstance the left has reversed the concept. Essentially what we’re being told is that no matter how many men say that Ford is wrong it doesn’t matter because Ford would never lie because she’s a woman. But we know that women lie about sexual assault.
We know for certain that Ford is not a good person. Because good people don’t anonymously, but publicly, accuse other people of things like rape. If she was sincere in trying to prevent someone who she honestly thought had assaulted her from being on the Supreme Court without making her claims public then she should have either told Kavanaugh in private to give him a chance to withdraw, or told the Republicans so that they would tell Kavanaugh to withdraw. Instead she intentionally hurt him and his family by making claims that it would be impossible for him to refute.
We know for certain that Ford is a far left anti-Trump person. That’s why her social media were all removedbefore she announced who she was. We know she gave money to leftist politicians.
We know for certain that the holes in Ford’s “memories” are optimally designed to make her accusation uncheckable. The lack of a specific date means that it’s impossible for Kavanaugh to show that he wasn’t at the event in question for example. If Ford specified a date then Kavanaugh could show that he was out of town or that he was at some other event. But without a date Kavanaugh can’t do that since it’s impossible to show that he was never near a house where no parents were present.
We know for certain that Ford has a basis for a personal vendetta against Kavanaugh since his mother ruled against Ford’s parents in a court case. As an aside ask yourself how likely it is that Kavanaugh would assault Ford and then years later her parents would happen to draw his mom as a judge in their case? On the other hand the fact that Kavanaugh's mother ruled against her parents gives Ford a motive to lie.
We know for certain that lie detector tests are not reliable especially when they’re administered by people who are paid by the person being tested. That’s why lie detector results aren’t admissible in court; essentially polygraphs are useful for scaring the person into telling the truth but not useful for actually finding out what the truth is. But if the polygrapher is being paid by Ford he’s hardly likely to be eager to show that Ford is a liar.
We know for certain that the two men who Ford has accused have both categorically denied that anything remotely like what Ford claims to have happened ever happened. This is not a case of “he said she said” but “he said, he said, she said”. This smacks of the Sharia law concept that a woman’s testimony isn’t as significant as a man’s though in this circumstance the left has reversed the concept. Essentially what we’re being told is that no matter how many men say that Ford is wrong it doesn’t matter because Ford would never lie because she’s a woman. But we know that women lie about sexual assault.
We know for sure that the third person that Ford has identified, who she says was not involved in any wrong doing, also denies her claims. This is very significant because according to her he has no reason to lie because she says he didn't do anything wrong.
We know for certain that Ford mentioned this “horrible” event to no one for decades. She says she didn’t mention it to her mom because she didn’t want her mom to know that she’d been at a party where kids were drinking—proving by the way that she is willing to lie if it advances what she perceives as her best interests. But what about her friends or cousins or anyone her own age? Why was she silent about what she is now claiming was a life altering event?
We know for certain that her therapist’s notes contradict her story. She says that the therapist got it wrong but what’s more likely that a dispassionate observer whose career depends on accurate notes wrote down something significantly wrong or that Ford needs to desperately change the narrative to attack a judge whose judicial philosophy she hates? What the left is saying is that any evidence that goes against Ford’s narrative is by definition incorrect. Talk about a sweet deal. Too bad the left doesn’t extend that belief to Trump’s comments on collusion.
It’s quite likely that Ford had a good motivation to make up the story. Think about it she and her husband were in couples counselling when it first came up. Nothing wrong with that but it means that they were having fairly serious problems in their relationship. If those problems involved her having difficulty relating to men which sounds better; she has difficulty relating to men because she has a problem or because four rich boys who became powerful men in Washington tried to rape her? The fact that she described the boys as going to a prestigious school and having become important is somewhat odd; does it matter if the person who assaulted you became important or is it true that all rapists are horrible scum no matter how they end up in life? Unless of course the story is made up and by claiming to have been assaulted by “important” people it made her look more important.
How do Ford’s accusations look in the context of recent history?
She’s made an unsubstantiated claim of a drunken 17 year old doing something that 65 other women who knew him at the time said was completely out of character for him and which he has never done again. Given that Ford doesn’t claim that she was raped—since she lacks the ability to read minds her saying that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her is just supposition-- or that she was physically harmed, that while the event was “traumatic” it wasn’t traumatic enough for her to talk to anyone about for decades is this grounds for saying that Kavanaugh is unfit to be on the Supreme Court?
Before answering that remember that Obama admitted to extensive illegal drug use in high school and we were told it didn’t matter by the same people who are condemning Kavanaugh.
Remember that Teddy Kennedy as an adult murdered a woman and engaged in sexual harassment on a regular basis but the same folk who are condemning Kavanaugh said it wasn’t relevant.
Remember that Bill Clinton was credibly accused of successful rape and multiple cases of sexual harassment and the #FakeNews media who are attacking Kavanaugh didn’t find that thnat disqualified him from being President.
We need to end the double standard. We can’t have every conservative presumed guilty until proven innocent on a nearly impossible to meet set of criteria while every leftist can literally get by with murder.
You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.
We know for certain that Ford mentioned this “horrible” event to no one for decades. She says she didn’t mention it to her mom because she didn’t want her mom to know that she’d been at a party where kids were drinking—proving by the way that she is willing to lie if it advances what she perceives as her best interests. But what about her friends or cousins or anyone her own age? Why was she silent about what she is now claiming was a life altering event?
We know for certain that her therapist’s notes contradict her story. She says that the therapist got it wrong but what’s more likely that a dispassionate observer whose career depends on accurate notes wrote down something significantly wrong or that Ford needs to desperately change the narrative to attack a judge whose judicial philosophy she hates? What the left is saying is that any evidence that goes against Ford’s narrative is by definition incorrect. Talk about a sweet deal. Too bad the left doesn’t extend that belief to Trump’s comments on collusion.
It’s quite likely that Ford had a good motivation to make up the story. Think about it she and her husband were in couples counselling when it first came up. Nothing wrong with that but it means that they were having fairly serious problems in their relationship. If those problems involved her having difficulty relating to men which sounds better; she has difficulty relating to men because she has a problem or because four rich boys who became powerful men in Washington tried to rape her? The fact that she described the boys as going to a prestigious school and having become important is somewhat odd; does it matter if the person who assaulted you became important or is it true that all rapists are horrible scum no matter how they end up in life? Unless of course the story is made up and by claiming to have been assaulted by “important” people it made her look more important.
How do Ford’s accusations look in the context of recent history?
She’s made an unsubstantiated claim of a drunken 17 year old doing something that 65 other women who knew him at the time said was completely out of character for him and which he has never done again. Given that Ford doesn’t claim that she was raped—since she lacks the ability to read minds her saying that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her is just supposition-- or that she was physically harmed, that while the event was “traumatic” it wasn’t traumatic enough for her to talk to anyone about for decades is this grounds for saying that Kavanaugh is unfit to be on the Supreme Court?
Before answering that remember that Obama admitted to extensive illegal drug use in high school and we were told it didn’t matter by the same people who are condemning Kavanaugh.
Remember that Teddy Kennedy as an adult murdered a woman and engaged in sexual harassment on a regular basis but the same folk who are condemning Kavanaugh said it wasn’t relevant.
Remember that Bill Clinton was credibly accused of successful rape and multiple cases of sexual harassment and the #FakeNews media who are attacking Kavanaugh didn’t find that thnat disqualified him from being President.
We need to end the double standard. We can’t have every conservative presumed guilty until proven innocent on a nearly impossible to meet set of criteria while every leftist can literally get by with murder.
You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.
't
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment