Advantage, Republicans

It might be that the Democrats have overplayed their hand here:

The woman who accuses US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of attempting to rape her will not testify to the Senate next week, her lawyer says.

Prof Ford’s legal team say they have written to the Senate Judiciary Committee declining its offer to testify.

Her lawyer told CNN on Tuesday night: “It’s premature to talk about a hearing on Monday because she [Prof Ford] has been dealing with the threats, the harassment and the safety of her family and that’s what she’s been focused on for the last couple of days.”

As soon as the allegations were made, the Democrats demanded an investigation. The Republicans, wrongly IMO, immediately launched one and scheduled a hearing with both Kavanaugh and Ford. Now Ford’s decided she doesn’t want to appear, and her lawyer thinks she’s under no obligation to corroborate her story. I suspect Ford is rather concerned she’s going to facing serious perjury charges if she testifies on Monday; the plan was obviously to use the allegations to sandbag Kavanaugh’s confirmation before the mid-terms, after which they’d come up with a reason why she couldn’t testify under oath. By moving quickly, the Republicans have called their bluff. It appears Ford’s refusal to appear has not gone down well with Republicans who supported an investigation because it was the right thing to do:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley later said that there was no reason to delay Prof Ford’s testimony as the aim would be to establish “her personal knowledge and memory of events”.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, said that if Prof Ford did not appear to testify on Monday, “we are going to move on and vote [on the nominee for the Supreme Court] on Wednesday”.

“They’ve had tons of time to do this,” he said, adding: “This has been a drive-by shooting when it comes to Kavanaugh, I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close.”

If Ford testifies, she’s likely to perjure herself. If she doesn’t, the vote goes ahead.

Chuck Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, said he supported the call for an FBI investigation prior to the hearing.

The FBI have already said they’re not interested, because it’s outside their jurisdiction and Kavanaugh has already been fully vetted. And as for this:

She said that since going public with her allegation in the Washington Post on Sunday, Prof Ford has been trying to work out where her family are going to sleep at night.

The legal team’s letter says that Prof Ford’s family has been forced to move out of their home, her email has been hacked and she has been impersonated online.

Is there any evidence of this, or are we supposed to take her word for it? The problem is, this is a well-worn tactic of leftist women: they smear someone in public, then trawl through the hundreds of thousands of responses they get from social media and highlight a handful of deranged ones to claim their lives are being threatened. Cathy Newman did this with Jordan Peterson, deftly presenting herself as the victim when her own disgraceful behaviour was called out. Laurie Penny does it regularly. So thanks to feminists using a few angry tweets to claim they’re receiving death threats, it is now impossible to believe someone who may be genuinely threatened. This is doubly true if the person in question is being used as a political pawn by liberal politicians.

Mr Trump also appeared to suggest that the controversy was being exploited by Democrats as lawmakers looked to delay the Supreme Court vote.

“The Supreme Court is one of the main reasons I got elected President. I hope Republican voters, and others, are watching, and studying, the Democrats’ Playbook,” he tweeted.

Well, quite. It’s about time the American public understood the true nature of Trump’s opponents, and if this circus serves to help with that, so much the better.

Share

19 thoughts on “Advantage, Republicans

  1. I can’t find it now but I read last night that Kavanaugh had not just denied the allegations but also that he was at any such party. This has set the bar fairly low for the Dems to get him disqualified, all they need is one credible witness that claims he was there and he will now be a proven liar and not only lose his nomination but also his current bench.

    Even worse for the Dems, next time they pull this stunt they’ll have even less credibility.

    Probably by mistake but the Reps seem to have played a blinder on this one.

  2. From here:
    https://m.theepochtimes.com/the-accuser-from-a-distant-past-who-is-produced-at-the-eleventh-hour_2663936.html

    According to the story Ford is telling, she cannot remember:

    Where the alleged assault took place. Not just which particular house. The TOWN.
    Who was present as the alleged assault took place. Was it 3 people or just 4?
    When the alleged assault took place. She can’t even narrow it down to a specific year.

    The one person the accuser has named as a witness of the alleged assault has gone on the record to deny that he ever witnessed any such thing.

    There’s so much that stinks about this, will be interesting to see whether helps or hinders the Dems at mid-terms

  3. The dems are treading on dangerous ground here which like the cancelling the filibuster option in the past will come back and bite them. Destroying everything in your hatred of Trump just opens the door to more SJW candidates being nominated over party stalwarts…….they are buggering themselves and I can’t think of a shittier bunch for it to happen to….outside of our labour party of course.

  4. She said that since going public with her allegation in the Washington Post on Sunday, Prof Ford has been trying to work out where her family are going to sleep at night.

    She first wrote to Feinstein back in June, and I can’t imagine she outed herself in the WaPo on the spur of the moment, but only afterwards has she thought about the alleged consequences for her family. Bollocks.

  5. Politics has always been a nasty game. I am currently reading ‘A Silent Coup’ about the real deal with Watergate, and even a few pages in the stuff that goes off behind the scenes is — almost — unbelievable, even among people who allegedly are on the same side.

    But the latest trends in politics on both sides of the pond seem to sink to a new low each year. One thing however is becoming certain: if the left keeps on coming up with spurious claims to try to disrupt the process of an elected government, should they get into office next time the dirt will be hurled back at them, possibly ten fold.

    The eternal stupidity of the left is their smug idea that only they can use such despicable tactics, and by some accounts they have much to hide.

  6. The thing of holding an investigation is a good tactic in this situation simply from the POV of transparency and opportunity.

    The worst thing to do is to refuse. It’ll always leave the allegation hanging. Announce an investigation and ask for testimony under oath, you’re pushing back. If they don’t, the allegation not only evaporates but becomes a smear and the people backing it end up discredited.

  7. This is bullshit, and should have been called out the instant it happened.

    It’s clearly such a brazen attempt to delay, I liken it to one of the mooslims running out in front of a armored column to set an IED in full view. It’s so transparent, it’s comical. The democrats have no intention of her testifying.

    I heard a woman caller on a radio show call this moonbat out. She had something similar happen to her (actually, she was raped) and can recall the details decades later into her 60s. She said you don’t forget that stuff.

    Indeed. I’m mid 50s can can recall nearly every high school party where I met a chick and thought I’d get lucky. I can remember the details of nearly every girl I’ve screwed – where we met, when it happened, what it felt like.

    So screw this chick. This is all a bullshit ploy to gum up the works. Honestly, Supreme court justices should meet the committee in closed session. All their work is open for public inspection. These meetings are nothing but theater. Grassly should have closed the meeting last week under the idea that they already broadcast their vote, what’s the point?

  8. @TechieDude on September 19, 2018 at 4:39 pm

    Indeed. I’m mid 50s can can recall nearly every high school party where I met a chick and thought I’d get lucky. I can remember the details of nearly every girl I’ve screwed – where we met, when it happened, what it felt like.

    +1 Me too

    imho Ford is lying

  9. She said you don’t forget that stuff.

    You don’t forget it, but you don’t recall it accurately, either. Traumatic events play hob with the short-term memory.

    I know a fair bit about Complex PTSD and traumatic psychology, and everything she’s released so far is consistent with an event having actually happened. From the “only realized it was an issue in couples therapy” bit to the incomplete memories along with the certainty about specific details. The problem is that it’s very likely that just about all the details are wrong and just because the event happened doesn’t mean she’s not up to callously using it to advance an agenda.

  10. Watcher – …should they get into office next time the dirt will be hurled back at them, possibly ten fold.

    Most likely they think otherwise, and with good reason: the dreaded payback tends not to happen. (It might finally be happening now under Trump…)

    Bloke on M4 – The worst thing to do is to refuse [an investigation]. It’ll always leave the allegation hanging. Announce an investigation and ask for testimony under oath, you’re pushing back. If [she won’t testify], the allegation not only evaporates but becomes a smear and the people backing it end up discredited.

    I don’t think there’s any way to discredit this woman (or her backers) in the eyes of the Democratic base, no matter how obvious it is that she’s lying. Case in point, I just saw some progressives talking about this, and they brought up the old Clarence Thomas thing: they still believe Anita Hill. Hell, there are still people who believe Tawana Brawley!

    No amount of proof will ever be enough for some; meanwhile, normal people can tell that this is a hatchet job. Since she’s refusing to testify, the GOP should dismiss her and carry on with the confirmation – no investigation required.

    The problem with an investigation is that it plays into the Democrats’s hands; it is in fact what they’re looking for. It’s a way they can drag this thing out until after the midterms, at which point hopefully they’ll have the votes to nix Kavanaugh outright, or at least they’ll have made a good enough showing that some of the more timid Republicans will be scared into supporting a “less divisive” candidate.

    Daniel Ream – that’s all true as far as it goes, but if you believe it actually applies in this woman’s case then you might be interested in these here magic beans…

  11. The longer this rumbles on the more likely it is to push “never Trump” Republicans in to becoming “fucking hell, even Trump can’t be as bad as that lot” Republicans and increasing the anti Dems turnout. Didn’t they learn anything from the “deplorables” speech?

    And what’s to investigate? An allegation was made which has been denied by one of the accused and the other has gone as far as to say there was no such party that he attended. By her own testimony there was nobody else at this party, or maybe there was as she can’t get her story straight. Its rather convenient for her that there was nobody else at this party because with all this publicity someone would have come forward to support her or the accused, they can’t all be living on Mars.

  12. “Its rather convenient for her that there was nobody else at this party because with all this publicity someone would have come forward to support her or the accused, they can’t all be living on Mars.”

    Its a bit difficult to come forward to declare your presence at a party described as at an undisclosed date and place c. 35 years ago………………I suspect that in the years 1981-83 in Washington DC metropolitan area a fair few teenage parties will have occurred.

  13. Wasn’t there a story the other week (albeit in the UK), from what I assume was some left leaning folk, saying that having a previous conviction shouldn’t stop you from becoming a judge.

    Using that logic, either was this shouldn’t matter

  14. “Using that logic, either was this shouldn’t matter”

    You forget the Left have no logic, just what is expedient at the moment in question to get what they want.

  15. Clem,

    That would only apply for proponents of GoodThink, for whom mere criminal conduct is incidental (it was a protest against injustice, it was social redistribution, it was PTSD from the horror of having heard of Thatcherism, it was a riot to bring down the vile Tories…).

    Compare the fainting fits over a vague, unproven accusation against Kavanaugh, to the tanker-loads of whitewash still being sprayed over Roman Polanski who was not only accused of trying to undress someone, but was convicted beyond reasonable doubt of drugging, raping and buggering a 13-year-old girl… but because he’s one of the Good People it surely can’t have been “rape-rape”, it was all just a misunderstanding, let bygones be bygones, she was a little tart who was begging for it anyway, what’s the fuss about, move along, nothing to see here…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *