New SCOTUS Judge

Status
Not open for further replies.
To counter the letter of 65 uninvolved classmates, >200 from the other side!

A group of women who went to Christine Blasey Ford’s high school are circulating a letter to show support for the woman who has alleged that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh tried to sexually assault her while they were in high school.

“We believe Dr. Blasey Ford and are grateful that she came forward to tell her story,” says a draft letter from alumnae of Holton-Arms, a private girls school in Bethesda, Maryland. “It demands a thorough and independent investigation before the Senate can reasonably vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to a lifetime seat on the nation’s highest court.”

The women also say that what Ford is alleging “is all too consistent with stories we heard and lived while attending Holton. Many of us are survivors ourselves.”

The letter is a boost of support for Ford, who has been thrust into the political spotlight and had her credibility questioned by going up against Kavanaugh and the White House. The signatories span decades at the school ― before, during and after Ford attended.

More than 200 women had signed the letter as of late Monday morning, said Sarah Burgess, a member of the class of 2005. (One notable signature: Julia Louis-Dreyfus, class of 1979, who said Monday afternoon that she had added her name to the letter. ) Burgess said she and some of her schoolmates wrote the letter because hearing Ford’s story felt “personal.”

“I know that in the coming days, her story will be scrutinized, and she will be accused of lying,” Burgess said in an email. “However, I grew up hearing stories like hers, and believe her completely.”

Susanna Jones, the Holton-Arms head of school, put out a statement Sunday night in support of Ford.

“In these cases, it is imperative that all voices are heard,” Jones said. “As a school that empowers women to use their voices, we are proud of this alumna for using hers.”
Click to expand...

Linky.
 
Lurch said:
I know that one shouldn't judge the proverbial book by its cover. But on the other hand, we're equipped with sensitive antennae to decode faces. Kavanaugh's weaselly, smarmy grin suggests to me that something's off about him. And when a nerve is touched he gives off vibes of deceitfulness. I know; hardly definitive evidence. But my Spidey senses... ;)
Click to expand...

But he was raised in a Catholic household with traditional values and where raping people would simply be unacceptable. He could never have done it or anything even remotely close to it.

I trust Trump on this.
 
luchog said:
For anyone who still thinks that this will get in the way of the GOP confirming Kavanaugh, here is what the stakes are that the GOP is already playing for:

Texas Republicans promise to reintroduce anti-gay marriage and bathroom bills in 2019

Excerpt:



The GOP powers that be are going to do whatever it takes to get Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court before this proposed legislation can be tested. They know that they have a very narrow window of time before they risk losing their House and Senate majority, especially the latter, and can see the growing trend toward Republicans and conservative-leaning Democrats being replaced with more progressive-leaning candidates. Expecting anyone in the party to flip and not toe the party line is very likely wishful thinking at this point, given the potential backlash should they do so.
Click to expand...

I really wish people stopped pushing their representatives to tell other people who to shag or what bathrooms to get into. Why are some people concerned about other people's lives? If God thinks gays are an abomination, let him deal with 'em.
 
eeyore1954 said:
The problem is how can that be resolved. If all three participants were drunk they may all think they correct in their recollection especially after so many years.

She may remember he tried to assault me while he might think when i became aware she did not want to continue I stopped. Similar situations have occurred to many.
Click to expand...


There were a lot more than three participants. We'll be hearing from other people at the party, assuming a party ever happened.

Kavanaugh claimed today that the incident never occurred, and that until the name was released, he didn't know who it was. If the "he might think" above was his version of events, he could have still instantly recognized the identity of the woman even before the name was released, assuming he didn't make a habit of such incredibly aggressive sexual behavior.

We're already seeing adolescent friends and acquaintances start appearing and talking. There will be testimony. There will be questions. Either her story will completely unravel, or his will, or both. At this point, the real question is not his behavior as a 17 year old, but his behavior last week. Through his denials, he is accusing the woman of slander, and he is doing it today, not in his adolescence. If it comes out that he is lying, he shouldn't be confirmed. If the story is uncorroborated with any other witnesses or other evidence, it shouldn't stand in the way.

Stay tuned for a week of sex, lies, and we can only hope no videotape.
 
Isn't there a saying among prosecutors, "There's no such thing as the perfect victim"? Kavanaugh's past has come out, and surely hers will as well.
 
Imagine having to face the two daughters with this accusation swirling. They are like 8 and 13.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
To counter the letter of 65 uninvolved classmates, >200 from the other side!



Linky.
Click to expand...

I only glanced at the story quickly, but it seemed that it was 65 people who knew Kavanaugh at the time, versus 200 who went to the same high school as Ford, but not at the same time as Ford. In other words, they wouldn't have known either Ford or Kavanaugh. (The article cited a woman in the class of 2005, but said that one from the class of 1979 was noteworthy.)

"We went to the same school, and heard similar stories, so we believe her." would be quite pathetic, although not atypical in modern times, when even a presidential candidate said that women should be believed just because they make an accusation. (Ms. Clinton subsequently amended here statement to be something sensible, but the fact that she could write something so stupid in the first place is a sign that we live in stupid times.)

I would say that the probative value of either the 65 signatories or the 200 is pretty close to zero. How men treat women outside of the bedroom isn't really a good indication of what will happen behind closed doors.
However, some of these people will have actual information, and so we will learn more. I'm not sure that we ought to learn more, but we will.
 
Bob001 said:
No link yet, but MSNBC is reporting that Kavanaugh is telling people "I was never even at that party!" As the woman herself says she doesn't remember which party or whose house, his specificity is raising questions.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a bit odd.

One possibility that would not finger him as lying about it would be that the incident really happened, and really did involve two (or four?) boys from Kavanaugh's school, but not Kavanaugh himself. Her first mention of the incident, to the therapist, didn't name names. It's possible that once more details of the story emerged, Kavanaugh recognized enough details from stories from friends that he knows about the party.

Another possibility is that Kavanaugh is lying, but he's not very good at it. Stay tuned.


ETA:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...assaulted-testify-Congress-says-attorney.html


Here's one link. Thanks to Daily Mail via the Drudge Report. All the news not fit to print. We'll see if any other sources that actually try to ensure accuracy follow it up with similar stories.
 
Last edited:
What is needed here is another accuser. He met his wife at age 36, so there were a lot of years of single life - college, law school, working... If there is anyone else out there with anything now is the time to come forward.
 
The accused partner in the crime is quite the piece of work.

“Of course there is never any excuse to rape someone,” Judge wrote in a post called “Feminism and Body Language: A Double Standard.” “But it’s possible to have two seemingly contradictory thoughts to be both equally true.”

He continued:

There’s never any excuse to rape, a crime that I think is almost akin to murder because the rapist kills a part of the human soul. And yet what women wear and their body language also send signals about their sexuality. If a woman at her computer in Starbucks is, as Jarune Uwajaren argues, sending out several signals simply by the way she is sitting, then women who dress like prostitutes are also sending out signals. The signal is not that they should be raped. But if a posture while drinking coffee is indicative of the soul and personality within, than so is marching down the street in your underwear. The former says that you are not interested in conversation or love. The latter says you can’t articulate an argument without using your body for cheap theatrics.​
Click to expand...
 
Meadmaker said:
I only glanced at the story quickly, but it seemed that it was 65 people who knew Kavanaugh at the time, versus 200 who went to the same high school as Ford, but not at the same time as Ford. In other words, they wouldn't have known either Ford or Kavanaugh. (The article cited a woman in the class of 2005, but said that one from the class of 1979 was noteworthy.)

"We went to the same school, and heard similar stories, so we believe her." would be quite pathetic, although not atypical in modern times, when even a presidential candidate said that women should be believed just because they make an accusation. (Ms. Clinton subsequently amended here statement to be something sensible, but the fact that she could write something so stupid in the first place is a sign that we live in stupid times.)

I would say that the probative value of either the 65 signatories or the 200 is pretty close to zero. How men treat women outside of the bedroom isn't really a good indication of what will happen behind closed doors.
However, some of these people will have actual information, and so we will learn more. I'm not sure that we ought to learn more, but we will.
Click to expand...

People have been trying to make something of the fact that the original 65 person letter came together so quickly, implying that Republicans knew about this allegation ahead of time. But I think this shows that they are both so empty and meaningless, in terms of character or "did it happen", they they could happen within a day without any foreknowledge.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
People have been trying to make something of the fact that the original 65 person letter came together so quickly, implying that Republicans knew about this allegation ahead of time. But I think this shows that they are both so empty and meaningless, in terms of character or "did it happen", they they could happen within a day without any foreknowledge.
Click to expand...

They could have gone through the school yearbook and called people: "Did this guy try to rape you? No? Great! Would you sign our letter?" Wouldn't take long.
 
I wonder if a Republican Senator is going to be stupid enough to go full scale hostile on the women in the hearings.
That would badly hurt the GOP with women voters, whom, they are aleady in deep trouble with.
 
Sen. Hatch didn't get the memo, that apparently even Kellyanne got to Trump, to tread lightly:

The Senate should consider who Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is “today,” even if allegations that he attempted to rape a woman in high school are found to be credible, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said Monday.

“If that was true, I think it would be hard for senators to not consider who the judge is today,” Hatch told reporters at the Capitol. “That’s the issue. Is this judge a really good man? And he is. And by any measure he is.”
Click to expand...

Linky.

Absolutely the wrong approach. As noted here and by Sen. Collins, if it was true it would mean he has been lying now and reflects on his character today.
 
dudalb said:
I wonder if a Republican Senator is going to be stupid enough to go full scale hostile on the women in the hearings.
That would badly hurt the GOP with women voters, whom, they are aleady in deep trouble with.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but Anita Hill was openly slandered during the Clarence Thomas confirmation and the Republicans did just fine.

A president who cared about appearing principled would kick this scumbag loose and find some other ******* who will be just as likely to reliably vote against humanity and for corporations and religion.
 
In the background:

Six Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee filed a lawsuit Monday against the National Archives and Records Administration to force the agency to release documents about US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

Linky.
 
Bob001 said:
They could have gone through the school yearbook and called people: "Did this guy try to rape you? No? Great! Would you sign our letter?" Wouldn't take long.
Click to expand...

What yearbook, though? Some other nearby school? Kavanaugh went to an all-boy's school, after all...

And in that case, what happens when reporters start contacting these women? Will they all vouch, or will many say "wait, what? I didn't know we were even talking about him!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom