If she in fact knows anything, then she is saying nothing more. Should she really be subpoenaed by the Committee? She already told them to stop calling and she would not sit for an interview. Regardless of the difference, nothing to interview here.
The arguments on this thread hit home for me. The relative who orally raped me from ages 4 or 5 til 7-ish is a youth pastor. I never told my parents until I was in my 30’s and only then because cousin dearest was returning to our state for a family reunion that I was unable to attend and I had a 5 year old deaf and mentally disabled niece who I wanted protected.
I hate to think that he could have been and still may be abusing children for years. But with no evidence and little ability to name dates and places (I can only specify one incident related to a newsworthy event happening at the same time) any accusation I made could have resulted in my rapist suing me for defamation. Or as evident through posters here and radio shows and elsewhere, who would believe me? I’d be judged as trying to destroy his career. Or since he was 17, why think he’s a threat now?
Sex offenders get away so easily that it is no wonder victims don’t come forward. We end up being vilified and shamed while the abuser is unscathed or defended.
No woman is going to make up stories and put herself through the hell that Ford is going through. Both political parties are causing her harm.
And Oh, I highly doubt that my therapists over the years ever felt the need to write down Loren’s name. There. I named him. I never use it in order to spare his sister pain. My cousin actually condemns him on Facebook if she or I post things dealing with abuse (she used to work with kids) but doesn’t realize it’s him.
what happened to you was a horrific felony, kkmama. What allegedly happened to Ford was a misdemeanor. not all “sexual assault” is the same, and we disrespect the victims when we treat it all in the same category.
This isn’t your situation at all. I realize you are looking at it through that lens, but this isn’t even close.
Please. Women do make up stories. Jackie Coakley of the UVa story. Crystal Magnum of Duke lacrosse infamy. Just to name two that hit major news. Not saying this woman is. Women lie, cheat, steal, murder and everything else. To say women dont make up stories is ridiculous. Gender does not make truth.
It could have been a topic of discussion because even if neither Kavanaugh nor Ford talked about it there was a third person in the room. Not to mention there were other people at the party who could have seen them go into the room or seen her run out upset when she got away.
@roycroftmom, how do you know that Kavanaugh or Judge didn’t talk about it afterwards and it got around? They claim now that it didn’t happen but that may or may not be true. Why not look into it? So either way you think two people are now lying about it?
Kkmama, I’m so sorry to hear you endured that.
I think she believes something happened, but I think it might have grown in her mind over the years. I am just disgusted at the distorted information and misinterpretations out there. And all the people who look at it through a biased lens and are saying “Well, she said it happened so it must be true.” I’ve dealt with so much of this stuff in my work as an employment lawyer, and I assure you that people lie all the time- men and women. I’ve been duped a number of times. I believe if he was a bad character and did something other than be 17 and drunk, there would have been more to talk about over the next 3 1/2 decades of his life. But there isn’t. Not one other woman has come forward to say #MeToo.
So investigate it. As someone on CNN pointed out, someone should ask Kavanaugh what he would do as a judge if a case came before him with only the plaintiff and the defendant speaking and no investigation. But that’s what the GOP wants done. After spending days grooming the defendant as he prepares to testify and the jury already finding in the defendant ‘s favor.
@KKmama I am so sorry about what happened to you. A 17-year-old who does that to a child is a seriously f%#ed-up person, and no doubt continues to be. I too see an enormous difference between what happened to you and the Kavanaugh situation. But I believe you, and I hope that you have had and continue to have the support you need, and that one way or another justice comes to Loren. (What is it with youth pastors, anyway?!) Please take good care of yourself, whatever that means for you.
Didn’t the plaintiff have months to be groomed too? Wasn’t that the purpose of the polygraph? She was lawyered up and prepared in July, when she alerted Congress and the Post.
Point is what happend 30 some years ago is not the Democratic Senators primary concern…delaying the vote is their primary concern. It is a horrendous thing for Blaséy Ford who may very well be totally being used for political purposes of delaying the vote and for Kavanaugh who is getting totally screwed since his confirmation hearings were for the most purposes over. This isn’t SUV on tv where some character is going to rise out of Suburban Maryland and say they were an eye witness at the party in question. Although not knowing the date or place kind of puts into the question of how the heck would anyone know “which” party this allegedly occurred.
I have, obviously, no way to judge what did or did not happen at that party. I was thinking today, however, that things I believed I remembered the details of very clearly (even things concerning my son, whom I love more than anything in the world), turned out to have happened differently than I had strongly believed they did. As people here have pointed out, it might be different for people who have suffered abuse, but memory can be a very tricky thing–especially after decades, and when there were substances involved. My feeling is that something traumatic probably did happen at that time, but no one–accuser or accused, or the people around them, can really be trusted to have reliable memories about the specifics. I’m guessing that five different people who believe they know exactly what happened would have five different stories. Where would that leave investigators?
@MomofWildChild, I’m also a lawyer and have also dealt with HR isssues. I’ve see the craziness that happens in work related claims and so I’m dismayed at the fact that you are dismissing her claim because you haven’t heard of others. This is why women don’t come forward.
So, you are stating the third person in attendance as fact, even though the person so named has flat out rejected being in such a position? In fact, that person put his position in writing to the Committee, under legal ramifications.
Again, what exactly is there to investigate? How?
Are you suggesting that the Feds track down every student/facutly/administrator in the school?
As an aside, an interesting summary of some of the “fake news” out there: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/19/us/politics/christine-blasey-ford-kavanaughs-fact-check.html
@suzy100 It’s not a matter of dismissing it. It’s a matter of there being absolutely no way to know what happened 36 years ago. No one has any way of knowing what actually happened. I see no way that this unsubstantiated allegation should disqualify him from continuing his judicial career on the Supreme Court. Frankly, even if it happened and he admitted it and said “I was drunk and stupid and behaved terribly and I’m sorry” I would be OK with him being on the Court with no black marks for 36 years.
Here’s my dilemma… On one hand, should a (possible) youthful indiscretion of more than 3 decades ago be a consideration in the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice? I can accept that one could discount such past behavior as being irrelevant to the current behavior/perspectives of said justice.
On the other hand, as a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and adult sexual assault – neither reported to more than 3 people in my lifetime, could I tolerate the uncontested appointment of said abuser(s) to the Supreme Court without a specific challenge/investigation? I don’t think so. Ford is believable.
I would definitely support an independent investigation.
@bluebayou I phrased it that way because it was in response to a hypothetical of how it could have been news that spread if neither Kavanaugh nor Ford discussed it. Hypothetically, if it happened as Ford said, there would have been at least one other person who may have said something at the time. The one who has said he doesn’t want to appear for questions.