From what I’ve read, she did not name names to her therapist. The only thing that came out in that therapy session was that she was assaulted in HS.
It’s my understanding that the FBI does not investigate/opine on credibility of those that they interview in background checks. (much different than that of a criminal investigation.)
Calling her a liar or claiming this is a “scheme” is without merit. This individual has jeopardized her safety, the safety of her family, and if this lacked veracity she could be potentially putting her CA state psychology license at risk. The judgmental tone is extremely off-putting.
Kavanaugh is not becoming a sympathetic figure to those who also don’t agree with the ideas of locker room talk and such.
Yesterday we also saw all over the place the clip from a speech Kavanaugh gave a few years ago about how what happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep.
That’s not at all a sympathetic take on him.
I don’t expect there will be an FBI investigation since that would mean Trump would be asking for it. That’s unlikely to happen. However, we don’t know what would or would not come out in an investigation. We don’t know who would be credible and who wouldn’t. I find it telling though that there are people strongly opposed to an investigation. My opinion is that they suspect something negative would turn up.
Well then there is nothing to investigate. There are no photos, no contemporaneous statements, no ripped clothing, certainly no DNA on any clothing, nothing.
I am also disgusted by those who say ‘she seems to be very credible’. Those people have never talked to her. They read a letter. Do they believe all letters sent to their offices? Or only those it is politically convenient to believe? If a mere letter without more can ruin a stellar career, then our standards are out of whack. Anyone can send a letter, say absolutely anything, particularly if they’ve had some contact with a famous person, and ruin a life.
“From what I’ve read, she did not name names to her therapist. The only thing that came out in that therapy session was that she was assaulted in HS”
This is a very important point to me. No statement to anyone (except possibly her husband?) prior to this point that it was Kavanaugh by name. So if she did experience an assault, there is no proof that it involved Kavanaugh. Rather, I think at least the possibility is there that she is now using the “history” of speaking to her therapist as a weapon against Kavanaugh.
There are no other women stepping forward and nothing else in his history that would lead me to dis-believe Kavanaugh’s word. If anything, there are 200 women who signed a letter in support of his character.
The people I feel the most sorry for are his two daughters who have to witness this character assassination of their father.
@TatinG -Her letter can ruin HER career. So yes, your standards are out of whack.
He’s already lied about other things during the hearings, so I disagree that there is nothing leading people to disbelieve his word.
I’ve known people convicted of crimes before. Until it came out, I would only have had good things to say about them. You don’t always know what acquaintances are capable of.
“He’s already lied about other things during the hearings, so I disagree that there is nothing leading people to disbelieve his word”
I’m not familiar with any proof that he has lied during the hearings. Do you have a link you can provide with this info? That would be lying to Congress, so I assume would have received press coverage.
I’m not afraid of an investigation- if something negative is out there, it likely would have come up this week. I do deeply object to the FBI being used for partisan politics. Career federal law enforcement officers have said they did the standard investigation they would do in such cases, and the matter is now closed for them. If you want to pursue further, call the Maryland DA with jurisdiction over Montgomery County. Don’t expect the FBI to do your bidding when it is not their job to do so.
Yes, it has. But I’m thinking that it would cross the political boundaries for this thread to post a link. You can Google it. I think the biggest issue is that not enough of his working documents have been released to know the answer for sure.
Unless an investigation means interviewing most of the former high schoolers and HS teachers of that time period, yeah we do know what would come out of it.
Dr. Ford would repeat her assault claim, and release only what counseling documents that her attorney approves of. Her husband would confirm that some time in the past Dr. Ford id’ed Kavanaugh as an attacker.
Therapist would say, ‘can’t talk due to client-confidentiality privilege’
Mr. Kavanaugh would deny anything happened.
Mr. Judge would say he (spent his high school years in party mode?) and doesn’t remember anything like what Dr. Ford is now alleging.
Feinstein has been sitting on this letter for months, and never mentioned it in her private conversations with Kavanaugh or in public testimony. Same deal with Eshoo.
I don’t need to Google it. If it has been established that he has “lied about other things during the hearings”, then there would be charges pending against him for lying to Congress. So then my assumption is that what you are saying is that there are people who believe that he has lied. Which is opinion, not fact, and should not be stated as such.
You know, we should start a separate thread on disqualifying actions. I had a somewhat misspent youth. I would not pass the scrutiny for a lifelong appointment to the highest court in the land (or probably any high level political office) because of it. And you know what? I’m fine with that. People need to own their actions. I own that there are consequences to my behavior. He is dodging his.
If a misspent youth were disqualifying, we would not have some of the finest political leaders our country has seen, like FDR and JFK. Be careful what you wish for.
And you know this, how?
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/me-too/570520/
Some of you may be interested in this take on the situation by Caitlin Flanagan, posted by The Atlantic last night.
Because women with everything to lose don’t put themselves out there like this unless they really have to in order to prevent giving massive power to someone with a serious character flaw. But y’all have convinced yourselves that “she said” isn’t true. When there is evidence that he and his friends were blackout drunk partiers. (See yearbook entries for him and friends, they have been published in the last 24 hours). I’m done with guys like this in positions of power. I bet if his nomination fails, they will nominate the woman on the shortlist next time.
“Because women with everything to lose don’t put themselves out there like this unless they really have to in order to prevent giving massive power to someone with a serious character flaw”.
I think we can probably all agree the reason she is doing this is because she wants to prevent him from having power. The disagreement is over why she doesn’t want him to have that power. And whether her personal reasons - and her claim - are legitimate. I believe that there are those so passionate about a cause that they could indeed have everything to lose and yet still willingly (or be led to) put it all on the line.
Those Senators should be careful. I’m a democrat and I’ve despised Joe Biden since the Anita Hill hearings (and the others, too, but I’d expect nothing less.)
Even after all the cool Uncle Joe memes and his apologies. Can’t stand him.