Would it fall under their vetting process for high office holders like they’ve done for him half a dozen times before? I assumed this is what the left has been implying when asking for an FBI investigation? Under normal circumstances it be a local authoritiy issue and so far the FBI has been claiming as such. I don’t see it is that far of a stretch to ask them since the topic was unknown to them at the time of the original vetting. Seems like something too that would be serious enough to possibly compromise him if true. In all though it’s just a long shot ploy to delay and hopefully sink him regardless of the actual validity of her story.
I guess it depends. If it falls under the vetting process they could certainly ask it since its just a massively detailed background check that does check sexual history. I think that is still at the behest of the administration or justice department though. Thats sort of what happened when Clinton had to withdraw one his nominees for AG. But hey, maybe Feinstein should have brought this shit up when they were doing the original investigation process when she found about it two months ago. From an "investigation" standpoint, which alludes to a criminal investigation, the FBI wouldnt have jurisdiction unless theres suspicion of a federal crime.
Well this should be interesting: https://twitter.com/jaybookmanajc/status/1042386834284789760/photo/1
I imagine the death threats that caused Dr. Ford to move and hire private security, had some influence on her behavior as well. I wouldn't call that backtracking by any stretch.
She's not recanting... and it's not like she'd have a choice in the matter if the FBI come asking questions. But much like the Cosby sequence of discovery, it'll be interesting to see how such public statements motivate others to come forward. Again, it'll be interesting to see if this dies on the vine as an attention grab or if it starts to unravel and expose other such conduct.
According to WaPo, Blasey Ford claims the attack took place in the summer: "Speaking publicly for the first time, Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s...." This woman claims it was talked about in school: "The incident was spoken about for days afterwords in school." Unless something has changed, Holton Arms is not a year round school. This all sounds rather fishy.
I think more stuff will come out, but I think they will vote to confirm him anyway. I think they would rather get this guy on the bench and deal with whatever consequences come from it. Most of their supporters don’t give a fuck about the metoo stuff anyway. Especially when it’s their guy. The problem with taking the moral high ground with respect to metoo stuff is that when it’s your side, you are forced to uphold your own standard. When it’s their people, and they clearly don’t care about rape and sexual assault, you can’t just make them start caring. Their voters don’t care, therefore they don’t.
Details get confused and lost over time, especially with a traumatic event like that. Without going into too much detail, I was the victim of abuse from my biological father, and I'll be damned if I can even pinpoint exactly how old I was during that time or what year, never mind if it was during the school year or summer break. And all that happened to me a lot more recently than this alleged event took place. I'm not judging the truth of these allegations, but just saying there is justified and understandable reason for the discrepancy in details coming from the alleged victim and her former classmates. I wouldn't be so quick to question her credibility based on a decades-old story not adding up in perfect order.
Well, at least there's something to investigate now. I mean, before she immediately refused to say anything further on the subject? That just added a whole other layer of weird to this whole situation. In all she wrote, only the first three sentences of the second paragraph are relevant to the incident in question. First of all who is "many of us"? Why didn't one of you say something since this has been out for a week. Who did you hear it from? What did you hear? How did any of you hear about it if there were only two other people in the room, other than the accuser, and Ford never told anyone about it? Did Kavanaugh, or Judge willingly spread the rumor around? Did Ford forget that she told the "many of us"? Did she forget that people were all gossiping about this? What the fuck? Assuming a sexual assault did happen, for a bunch "elite, privileged, mostly white, catholic", so-so-so white, intelligent successful grads these people have the worst goddamn memories ever. I know this would have occurred quite some time ago, but at this rate it's like an early onset of alzheimers for everyone involved. If she's going silent maybe another one of the "many of us" can provide some clarification. No more circus and all that. Mostly, she just made it obvious that she really dislikes Kavanaugh as a judge - which is fine - everyone has their beliefs, but if she's sincerely trying to make a point maybe it wasn't a good idea to be so blatant on that. I can't believe she started out with a tangent about how bitter she still is she got stood for a date when she was a teenager (she can't remember if this trauma occurred for junior or senior prom - of course). I had classmates I hated in high school. I haven't cared about that or given it much of a thought in years. Who the fuck has the energy to carry grudges like that into their 50s?
Unrelated to anything currently being discussed, but can we all agree that a tiny exception to the first amendment should be allowed wherein journalists are banned from using the word "slam" in any headline not directly related to professional wrestling? Holy fuck am I over that word.
There is a whole host of verbs that are used in modern headline reporting that need to fucking die. The other one off the top of my head, "torches." Jimmy Kimmel Torches Trump after tweetfest call out." "Twitter torches Kimmel for torching Trump on twitter."
Quick timeline: Ms. Miranda: "This incident did happen" A couple hours later: Ms. Miranda: "I do not have firsthand knowledge of the incident" A couple hours later, she deletes her Twitter account. That was certainly helpful to the case. Maybe she read up on defamation law?
Yeah, death threats are completely unacceptable in any regard and those people should investigated fully. But as far as the case is concerned, how would Miranda know about the incident within a couple days if Ford claims she didnt tell a single person for over a month? And now Ford is refusing to testify in front of the Senate Committee. They even offered her a private session to make her case without the media hounding her and at an undisclosed time. One of the people she claimed was there, completely denied any knowledge of the event or that the party even occurred in the first place. I know the story is ongoing, so who knows what further developments will happen in the next 48 hours.
Probably. They always crop up with cases like this. If they're directed at you, you have to take them at least somewhat seriously, but I'm going to guess that like the other 99.9% of the time this doesn't end in a trail of bodies. She didn't have to deal with any of that though, if she didn't want to. She could easily have gone to the NYT, or WAPO, and they would have anonymously published what she had to say. Or at least they would if she actually had something important to say regarding the case. Doesn't seem like she does. I thought it was 30 years? Now, she told people a month after it happened? This case has WTF written all over it. If she's not going to testify before congress, then why is she doing any of this? I wish people didn't suck so much and weren't harassing her over the allegations, but if she's not going to testify before congress then she's just wasting everyone's time and they should move forward with the confirmation. He might not get confirmed because the republicans who are looking at tough races for reelection are going to be really nervous about being wrong. If they vote to confirm, and let's just say hypothetically another half dozen accusers come out after it could easily cost them their seats. If this case doesn't start moving forward with any coherency though, I think they'll still put him through. I don't know that there truly is a "profile" of a false accuser. I'm sure that author is 100x more feministy than me so I'll take her word for it, but the most common reason for false claims is a vendetta against the person they're accusing. I suppose there's nothing glaring, but is a semi-nutty professor who signs ACLU letters so far outside such a profile? "I thought he was going to inadvertently kill me" isn't anything overly dramatic? The nonsensical misconception of a "perfect victim" is one of the few things I totally agree with feminists on, but with all due respect to the fallibility of human memory this isn't normal. Practically every woman I've known who is able to maintain a figure under 300 lbs has an experience that is a rough equivalence to the assault she described, or worse, but they do remember things. At the least they can tell you what year it was, and give a basic outline of the interactions they had with the person who assaulted them before it happened. For Ford, there's the assault, and then apparently anything and everything around it is a gaping black hole. Maybe that's not the case and she just needs to tell the full story, but if she wants to come out a week before the confirmation vote she needs to take congress up on their offer to testify.
#resist It's a stall tactic, pure and simple. She has no intentions of testifying, her lawyers know the FBI won't investigate because there is nothing to investigate. A crime allegedly took place at some place, at some time approximately 35 years ago. 2 of the 3 people that were supposedly at the alleged crime have denied any knowledge of what the hell she's talking about. One crack pot with an axe to grind making a facebook post claiming that the incident did actually happen, back tracking and saying she has no firsthand knowledge, and then disappearing into the ether isn't exactly corroborating evidence. There is nothing to investigate, her lawyers know this, so they have nothing to lose by demanding an investigation that will never happen.
Yeah, I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I'm getting really sick of this shit. He's going to overturn RoevWade, he supports racial profiling, he's committed perjury more times than anyone can count, he's a gambling addict, and now there's just no way people shouldn't wholeheartedly believe this 11th hour accusation of an attempted rape. So far, all of the reasons he would be the worst supreme court justice in American history is missing only one thing. Oh right, actual evidence.
Uh... the dude said as much. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/05/politics/kavanaugh-roe-v-wade-planned-parenthood-casey/index.html
She's the only one calling for a full investigation... what do you mean she has no intention of testifying? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...naugh-blasey-ford-hearing-20180918-story.html