DiFi Borking Letter

Has it occurred to anyone else that even DiFi doesn’t believe this yenta?
«13456711

Comments

  • And really? A fucking polygraph???? Who do they think they're fooling with that horseshit?
  • CNN says it has the letter.

    July 30 2018
    CONFIDENTIAL
    Senator Dianne Feinstein
    Dear Senator Feinstein;
    I am writing with information relevant in evaluating the current nominee to the Supreme Court.
    As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak.
    Brett
    Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in
    the early 1980's. He conducted these acts with the assistance of
    REDACTED.
    Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school.
    The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.
    Kavanaugh
    physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a
    short stair well from the living room. They locked the door and played
    loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help.
    Kavanaugh
    was on top of me while laughing with REDACTED, who periodically jumped
    onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in
    their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth I
    feared he may inadvertently kill me.
    From across the room a very drunken REDACTED said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from "go for it" to "stop."
    At
    one point when REDACTED jumped onto the bed the weight on me was
    substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other.
    After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune
    moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the
    bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at
    which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited
    the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home.
    I
    have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see REDACTED
    once at the REDACTED where he was extremely uncomfortable seeing me.
    I
    have received medical treatment regarding the assault. On July 6 I
    notified my local government representative to ask them how to proceed
    with sharing this information . It is upsetting to discuss sexual
    assault and its repercussions, yet I felt guilty and compelled as a
    citizen about the idea of not saying anything.
    I am available to speak further should you wish to discuss. I am currently REDACTED and will be in REDACTED.
  • If DiFi thought there was even a remote possibility that the accusation was legit, she would have used it during the hearing.
  • MC Escher said:

    If DiFi thought there was even a remote possibility that the accusation was legit, she would have used it during the hearing.



    No doubt, and that was the conclusion of several as soon as this accusation emerged.

    This morning on the radio Nina Totenberg assured that this means the Senate will need to delay confirmation while the matter is investigated.  Recall her role in attempts to derail Thomas' confirmation.



    The other fellow accused of being in the room responded.

    In an email Sunday afternoon to THE WEEKLY STANDARD, Judge responded to the Washington Post
    report: "Now that the anonymous person has been identified and has
    spoken to the press, I repeat my earlier statement that I have no
    recollection of any of the events described in today’s Post
    article or attributed to her letter. Since I have nothing more to say I
    will not comment further on this matter. I hope you will respect my
    position and my privacy."

    In response to an earlier New Yorker story alleging
    that Kavanaugh as minor had "attempted to force himself" on an unnamed
    female high school student in Judge's presence, Judge told TWS on Friday: "It’s just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way."

    According to the Post, "Ford said she does not
    remember some key details of the incident. She said she believes it
    occurred in the summer of 1982, when she was 15, around the end of her
    sophomore year at the all-girls Holton-Arms School in Bethesda.
    Kavanaugh would have been 17 at the end of his junior year at Georgetown
    Prep."

    Kavanaugh, who is now 53 years old, was confirmed as a federal appeals court judge in 2006. The Post
    reports that there are not contemporaneous accounts of the allegation,
    but Ford recalled the story to a therapist for the first time in 2012:
    "Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012,
    when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes,
    portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by the Washington Post,
    do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was
    attacked by students 'from an elitist boys’ school' who went on to
    become 'highly respected and high-ranking members of society in
    Washington.' The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford
    says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four
    boys at the party but only two in the room." In an interview with the Post,
    Ford's husband "said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last
    name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might
    one day be nominated to the Supreme Court."




    https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/professor-christine-blasey-ford-woman-alleging-misconduct-by-brett-kavanaugh-in-high-school-steps-forward
  • The article, which The New Yorker published in 2012, is a Jeffrey Toobin analysis about Bret [sic] Kavanaugh and the threat he would pose should he get on the Supreme Court.  According to Toobin, Kavanaugh was a scary conservative who, if he got on the Court, might overturn Obamacare[.] ...

     Just pay attention to that last paragraph:

    If a Republican, any Republican, wins in November, his most likely first nominee to the Supreme Court will be Brett Kavanaugh. (Emphasis mine.)

    In 2012, Romney might have won the election. In 2012, Toobin stoked Democrat fears that Kavanaugh, a conservative, might get on the Supreme Court and overturn Obamacare.  And in 2012, Ford…suddenly can't stop talking about her hitherto undisclosed claim that Kavanaugh was a bad boy almost 30 years before.

    It certainly is an odd coincidence.



    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/kavanaughs_accuser_recovered_her_memory_at_the_time_dems_were_panicked_romney_would_win_and_nominate_him_to_scotus.html
  • Slap said:

    It certainly is an odd coincidence.




    This accusation must be delayed while the coincidence is investigated. /Totenberg
  • Totenberg referred to Blasey-Ford as the "protagonist". I mean, wow...
  • Ford's attorney: She must be heard by the Senate!
    Senate Dems: She must be given a hearing before we vote on the nomination!
    Senate Repubs:  OK.  We're open Monday.  Open session or closed, your choice.
    Ford's attorney:  No way!  The FBI has to investigate this.  It isn't her job to provide any information!
    Senate Dems:  Yes.  We must have an FBI investigation so the examination of the issue isn't tainted by partisanship.

  • I admit that I was willing to give her some credibility when she initially agreed (through her attorney) to testify in front of the Senate. I thought, "It would be pretty ballsy to out and out lie. It seems that *she* thinks that something happened. Let's hear her out..."

    Also, knowing that times back then were a little different and her perspective might have viewed some drunken horsing around as something much more dire. There certainly doesn't seem to be any pattern of behavior of assaulting women on Kavanaugh's end.

    But this back-stepping and demand for a federal investigation is such a blatant delaying tactic. Total horseshit.
  • Seabird said:

    I admit that I was willing to give her some credibility...
    It's not yours to give, but thanks for illustrating the nature of the problem.
    Seabird said:

    ...times back then were a little different and her perspective might have viewed some drunken horsing around as something much more dire...

    So does "horsing around" include cranking up the tunes to drown out her yelling, and covering her mouth to prevent her yelling in the first place?

    What's "different" now is that entitled little shits can't expect to simply walk away from assault charges, anymore. You might have noticed that, to borrow a phrase from Eric, the women are sick of your shit.
  • If neither her attorney nor DiFi believe her, why should we?
  • edited September 19
    vwtool said:

    Seabird said:

    I admit that I was willing to give her some credibility...
    It's not yours to give, but thanks for illustrating the nature of the problem.
    Seabird said:

    ...times back then were a little different and her perspective might have viewed some drunken horsing around as something much more dire...

    So does "horsing around" include cranking up the tunes to drown out her yelling, and covering her mouth to prevent her yelling in the first place?

    What's "different" now is that entitled little shits can't expect to simply walk away from assault charges, anymore. You might have noticed that, to borrow a phrase from Eric, the women are sick of your shit.


    Oh, fuck off. Once again, Mr Disdain is here to enlighten us from the perspective of his upturned nose. Your assumption is that she's both truthful and accurate on all accounts. But hey, you've already made up your mind so to view any of her claims with skepticism is unthinkable.

    You are such a cliche'.
  • Seabird said:


    But this back-stepping and demand for a federal investigation is such a blatant delaying tactic. Total horseshit.



    Indeed. It's the transparent cynicism that's notable. It indicates a calculation that apparently false objections will suffice for enough of their constituents that it is better for them to lodge those false objections than to vote "no" without falsehood.
  • MC Escher said:

    If neither her attorney nor DiFi believe her, why should we?

    This.

    It's last minute, desperation, October surprise, horse shit.
  • My SIL runs pretty hard to the left and her response to all of this was, "If he didn't do anything, what are republicans afraid of? Hmmmmm?". I said, "They're afraid that a man who has already undergone several federal background checks (from the time he clerked for the SCOTUS, to the time he was appointed to the federal bench) will be denied a seat on the highest judicial body in the land over a pretty shocking and last minute claim from a self-described progressive without any real proof."

    Fucksticks like tool embrace the accusation like an infant with a security blanket, not because they're worried about a woman who might or might not have been assaulted, but because it's a convenient reason to pillory someone whose ideals are not their own.
  • It would be worth the entertainment of another hearing if Ted Kennedy were still around and on the committee.
  • Wasn't he chappacquitted?
  • Seabird said:

    My SIL runs pretty hard to the left and her response to all of this was, "If he didn't do anything, what are republicans afraid of? Hmmmmm?"



    Not much, given that they offered her a hearing.
  • edited September 19
    vwtool said:

    So does "horsing around" include cranking up the tunes to drown out her yelling, and covering her mouth to prevent her yelling in the first place?

    What's "different" now is that entitled little shits can't expect to simply walk away from assault charges, anymore.

    Nothing Bret Kavanaugh is accused of having done as a teenager is as sleazy or corrupt as the way some Democrats approach politics, including you tool.  Your grotesque double standards, one for Bill Clinton's accusers, another for Bret Kavanaugh's, are the sort of corruption that helped Trump win the Presidency.  Maybe you should stop being so corrupt.
  • They can’t help it. You can’t be a Marxist without an underlying psychological issue.
  • 2.FOH. said:

    Wasn't he chappacquitted?

    Golf clap
  • edited September 20
    Tool will recognize this part of Ann Coulter's latest from Takimag:
    It’s also great how the media act as if attempted rape was perfectly acceptable in America, until we were educated by the #MeToo movement. No, the breakthrough of the #MeToo movement was that it was finally acceptable to call out liberal sexual predators.
    Until recently, it was OK to rape and even murder girls — but only if your name was “Clinton,” “Kennedy” or “Weinstein,” et al. Then Hillary lost, and Teddy was dead, so there was no point in ferociously protecting the Democrats’ rapists any longer.
    http://takimag.com/article/haven-monahan-to-tetify-in-kavanaugh-hearings/

    Ann Coulter's mockery is well earned in this case.  Sometimes she strikes me as more abrasive than is helpful in persuading moderates, but on this occasion the Democrats out to delay Kavanaugh by any means necessary deserve the ridicule.
  • Less mockery, more sober analysis of why Grassley shouldn't let the Democrats get away with this tactic.
    The long-term goal here is to make the judicial-confirmation process so notoriously savage and demeaning that no sensible, well-meaning conservative or moderate person would agree to put himself and his family through it. The idea is to stock the courts with nothing but progressives and mediocrities willing to roll over for progressives. It is a disgrace that this should happen in this republic, and in connection with the courts, which are not supposed to be political forces, but which have been converted into an uber-political institution that progressives are desperate to control.
    The short-term goal is to delay Kavanaugh’s nomination. Democrats should not be allowed to get away with it.
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-accuser-must-testify/
  • I'm not certain that sobriety describes the spirit of this lavishly dramatic chapter.  Coulter's levity is not a bad fit.

    "Blasey Ford already knows what she thinks happened. I’ve been waiting my
    whole life to unburden myself about that night in 1981, 1982 or 1983 in
    a dark bedroom. Well, I’m not sure if it was a bedroom, but it
    definitely had a door. And a ceiling and a floor-ish kind of thing. And
    walls — I know I was surrounded by walls. I remember thinking, “OH MY
    GOSH, I’M IN A CLOSED SPACE!” On one hand, walls keep me warm, but
    that’s also why I’ve never enjoyed sex."

    and,

    "And, boy, was Hill right about Clarence Thomas! (Honorary white male.)
    He got confirmed, and now he issues conservative rulings. We warned you."

    In a a story that includes Hawaiian special needs senator Hirono calling Grassley's report of attempts to confirm the scheduling of the accusor's testimony "bullshit", and who called for american men to "shut up", parody and sarcasm have a lot of merit.
  • 2.FOH. said:

    Wasn't he chappacquitted?

    There are a lot of great things in this thread but this is the greatestest.

    Tool, can you please post the most compelling article you've found on this topic that supports your view?  
  • Democrats have popularized a term that they use to distract from their hypocrisy: “Whataboutism”

    I like to respond; “OK, what about it?”
  • edited September 20
    There's no link to it yet, but this morning NPR spoke to some woman (Jill Wienstein, I think?) who was an investigator during Watergate who said that there should be an investigation. It didn't take long for her bias to shine through. Within the first couple of minutes, she began bitching and griping about how Garland never got a hearing. Even the interviewer tried to cut her off because her agenda was so obvious. Typical for NPR had to dig up someone whose most notable experience comes from over 40 years ago, and is totally unrelated to the subject at hand. A hamfisted attempt to correlate the two events in order to present her as some sort of expert.
  • I didn't hear that, but I did hear a short interview of the woman who had posted on her facebook page that the incident described by Blasey had happened.  A schoolmate of Blasey's, this woman complained that when she posted it, she didn't know she would have to back it up with details, and that she didn't actually have any firsthand knowledge about it.  She did know Kavanaugh, but not well, and may have been stood up for a dance.

    She did drop the bombshell that kids drank and attended parties back then.  I'm so glad we have government subsidized media to bring us real news.
  • edited September 20
    Seabird said:

    ...Oh, fuck off...

    Persuasive. /zuk
    Seabird said:

    ...Your assumption is that she's both truthful and accurate on all accounts...

    Nope. I was pointing out that you thinking credibility was yours to give is part of the problem. 

    Your assumption seems to be that she's a lying, politically-motivated minx out to ruin the reputation of your wet-dream justice. 
  • vwtool said:



    Your assumption seems to be that she's a lying, politically-motivated minx out to ruin the reputation of your wet-dream justice. 




    You would be better served by reading before writing that sort of thing. Bird clearly is describing a process by which he came to an intermediate conclusion, not merely an assumption.

    RIF.

    If Sen. Feinstein assessed the credibility of this accusor, and chose to never bring it up with the nominee in conversation or at hearing, what does that tell you about her assessment?
Sign In or Register to comment.