If this is the standard of evidence required to ruin a life no one is safe

Interesting that it is posted by MSNBC which they would only do if they thought it works against PDT.

And then there’s this:

UH OH, IT MUST BE BAD FOR THE DEMOCRATS:

AND NOW LET ME ADD THIS: Christine Blasey Ford ex-boyfriend says she helped friend prep for potential polygraph; Grassley sounds alarm. First para:

In a letter released Tuesday and obtained by Fox News, an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, seemingly contradicts her testimony under oath last week that she had never helped anyone prepare for a polygraph examination.

And then lots more after that.

What’s evidence got to do with it?

Since only someone desperate to keep Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court using any means whatsoever could have actually believed Christine Ford’s story, this is not entirely a surprise: The Case against Kavanaugh Is Collapsing. As it says:

Yesterday, Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell released a memorandum to all Republican senators summarizing Ford’s evidence against Kavanaugh. I’d urge you to read the entire thing. Democrats are describing it as a “partisan document,” but it refers to multiple, undisputed facts that should cause even Ford’s most zealous defenders to pause and reevaluate her claims.

Ford has no corroborating witnesses, and even the friend she says was at the party in question has denied being there or knowing Kavanaugh at all. She doesn’t know who invited her to the party, where it took place, how she got there, or how she got home after, by her account, Kavanaugh attacked her. But the problems go beyond gaps in memory. She has offered substantially different accounts about when the attack occurred (she’s previously said it happened in the “mid Eighties,” in her “late teens,” and in the “Eighties.” Now she’s saying it happened in 1982, when she was 15) and how it occurred (her therapist’s notes conflict with her story of the attack, and she has offered different accounts about who attended the party).

If you are still onside with CBF and actually capable of believing what she said, you are a one-eyed idiot with hardly a shred of visible interest in justice and the processes of a free society. You are content to live in a society that will throw you to the wolves if it suits the government at the time to do so. You are as politically and morally as low as it comes, but standard issue on the left. There are plenty around like it. The issue anyway has from the start been entirely about politics since there has never been a doubt in my mind that the Democrats in Congress have themselves never personally believed Ford; they have played the issue out because they know just how dumb and fundamentally immoral a large proportion of the people who vote for them are. The final question is how this will affect the outcome of the Congressional elections in November. Here is a straw in the wind, which I hope eventually becomes a full-scale tornado.

 

UPDATE: I read this in the Financial Review as I was wrapping the fish: Two senators show the Kavanaugh battle isn’t a total doom spiral. Go to the link for it all, but this will give you the flavour.

Two moments leapt out. The first was the bravery of Dr Christine Blasey Ford, who delivered a devastatingly credible account of her sexual assault when she was 15 years old, she says with “100 per cent” certainty, by Kavanaugh.

None but the most mean-spirited and twisted have doubted the sincerity of her testimony.

It was a landmark event.

What do “mean-spirited and twisted” have to do with it? It is about trying to sift out whether there is any truth in what she said, not whether we should be sorry for her. Try logical and fair minded instead, and then there are no end of doubts not just about the facts of her testimony but of her sincerity as well. Amazing to read this since I have no doubt about the sincerity of the reporter as well, but that is just the point.

“Advice and consent replaced by search and destroy”

I made it through until lunch, but with lunch 3:00 am here in Melbourne, I bailed out. Did not get to hear Kavanaugh himself in real time, but he actually says what needs to be said that virtually no one else has till now said. But he is dead on. You can also read some of the highlights here. Very powerful, and obviously true. If you have the time.

But what I did watch was the first half of Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony. It was amazing to watch the Republican female lawyer cross-examination. Very slow build up on what she was getting at, since she could cross-examine only during a sequence of five-minute bites, but eventually you could see where she was going. Some of the bits that did ring true to me and show CBF a liar:

  • she flies everywhere – the statement that she did not want to fly, and therefore could not attend the hearing, is a complete lie
  • she denied ever having heard that the Committee had offered to fly out to see her in California if she didn’t wish to come to Washington
  • she was asked if she had discussed whether she should denounce Kavanaugh, she said that she had, but only with some “beach friends”, casual acquaintances who obviously cannot be found and examined
  • she had no sensible reason for having had a lie-detector test in July-August for reasons that could not be explained unless she was absolutely wishing to come forth and spike the nomination
  • she lived something like 6-8 miles from the country club and yet insists she ran out of the house after being assaulted but has no recollection of how she might have gotten home – and at 15, as she noted, she was not able to drive.

What I find quite interesting, but is never brought up since saying anything along these lines is verboten, is that she was a complete party girl; no shrinking flower. The notion that a random high school attack was so devastating that it has scarred her for life is improbable, to say the very least. The things you have to believe to be a Democrat! Sickening and depraved.

And PDT. Trump blasts ‘sham’ Senate hearing, tweets support for Kavanaugh.

President Trump showered praise on Judge Brett Kavanaugh moments after a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee into sexual assault claims against the Supreme Court nominee ended Thursday.

“Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” Trump tweeted. “His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!”

On the Road to Washington

All the pictures of her that I’ve seen show someone in their early twenties, or so it seems to me. It may actually be how she looks today in reality that will be quite telling. Juanita Brodderick has aged since she was attacked by Bill Clinton in the 1970s which may make the association with her rape accusation seem less plausible than it actually is. In the vid, however, there Christine is, a bit aged and befuddled, perhaps the consequences of her alcoholic past and who knows what else given her California home.

The woman is also supposed to be an adult, a similar age to someone old enough to be appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Maturity, however, does not appear to be one of her strengths.

There is then, of course, Kavanaugh’s calendar, discussed here. This is August, 1982.

kavanaugh kalendar

Every movie and party he went to, but no beach house and no Christine.

The Scottsboro boy

The sensibilities of the left are under constant recalibration depending on whatever might give them power at any particular moment. Situational ethics has nothing to do with it since there is nothing remotely ethical about how the left operates. The single most important American novel of the latter half of the twentieth century – based on how often it seems to have been assigned to high school students – was Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird. The story might have been a parable for our times up until the present, but that was then, this is now. All this is discussed here: Resisting a Lynch Mob. Let him explain:

The story is based on Lee’s childhood in rural Alabama during the 1930s. The narrator is six-year-old Jean Louise Finch. The protagonist is her father, Atticus, who is a small-town lawyer appointed by the court to represent Tom Robinson, a black man who has been charged with raping Mayella Ewell, a young white woman. Despite the community’s near universal condemnation, Atticus defends Tom in and out of court.

And, of course, the girl was lying about having been raped and the black man was falsely accused. So there was a time when one could have said in public that a woman might actually lie about rape. Not now, of course, but you could do it then. But there is an even older story that I grew up with, another famous story about a false rape accusation.

The Scottsboro Boys were nine African American teenagers, ages 13 to 20, accused in Alabama of raping two White American women on a train in 1931. The landmark set of legal cases from this incident dealt with racism and the right to a fair trial. The cases included a lynch mob before the suspects had been indicted, all-white juries, rushed trials, and disruptive mobs. It is commonly cited as an example of a miscarriage of justice in the United States legal system.

Once again, you cannot necessarily believe the woman. There might have been some reason to think CBF’s story is true, if it hadn’t happened 36 years ago; if the Democrats had no history of dredging up farfetched stories from the past to achieve an outcome that is plainly on the face of it unjust; if there were zero evidence that anything of the kind had ever happened; if none of the other people who were supposedly there at the time had any recollection of the moment; and if there is were any reason to have made a Federal case of it even if the events had actually happened.

Possibly worst of all, the incident, even if it had happened, trivialises the actual circumstances of rape. Trying to turn such an obvious untruth as the standard of he-said-she-said will make genuine cases more difficult to prosecute since the entire process becomes discredited. Beyond this, the use of a rape accusation that no one actually believes is true – and no one on either side does – degrades the political process into an anything-goes procedure in which politics is itself shown to be a conman’s game, rather than an institutional structure in which good governance through communal discussion is the process on which all sides can depend.

And if you want to read about how sick, scary and depraved a madhouse the left is making of America, try this: When Every Boy Is Guilty, Every Girl Becomes a Monster, followed by this: How to ‘Christine Blasey Ford-Proof’ Your Son.
 
Do you really think you can discuss things with these people? Reason with them? They are ideologically blinded and filled with hate. We need to protect ourselves as best we can, like against a typhoon. But there is no point in argument with people who have nothing to contribute to any conversation other than accusations and uncontrolled fury.