Bizarre, Congress, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Society

The Kavanaugh Hearing Leaves Lingering Questions Over Representations Made To The Committee By Counsel

Yesterday’s Kavanaugh hearing left many questions on both sides, including the ultimate question of the alleged attempted rape of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.  However, for lawyers, one exchange sticks out from a professional standpoint.  Ford was questioned why she delayed the hearing due to her alleged fear of flying and, more importantly, why she did not simply meet with committee staff in California.  Ford admitted that, while she does not like to fly, she does in fact routinely fly around the world, including frequent trips to nearby Delaware.  The most striking statement however was the suggestion that she was never told by counsel that she did not have to fly to Washington and the Committee was ready to fly to her — a prospect that she said she would have welcomed.  That left a lingering question of whether her counsel did not tell her of a material offer or whether she misrepresented the reason for her delay in speaking to the Committee.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) challenged Ford when she said

“I was hoping that they come to me. But, then, I realized that that was an unrealistic request. . . . So, that was certainly what I was hoping – was to avoid having to get on an airplane – but, I eventually was able to get up the gumption, with the help of some friends, and get on the plane.”

Chairman Grassley immediately raised the conflict with what the Committee had been told by her counsel on her behalf:

“Dr. Ford, I want to correct the record, but it’s not something that I’m saying that you stated wrongly, because you may not know the fact that, when you said that you did not think that it was possible for us to go to California as a committee, or investigators to go to California to talk to you – we did, in fact, offer that to you. And, we had the capability of doing it, and we would have done it, anywhere or any time.”

That offer was made on Sept. 21st and it was sent to Ford’s lawyers.

That offer was widely reported in the national media so it was curious why Ford was unaware of the offer, but it was in direct conflict with what the Committee understood from her counsel.  However, there was an objection from counsel when she asked whether it “was communicated to you by your counsel or someone else that the committee had asked to interview you, and that they offered to come out to California to do so?”

Ford responded

“Can I say something to you? Do you mind if I say something to you directly? I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn’t clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not — it was not clear to me that that was the case.”

It was not explained how an offer to fly to her in California was not “clear.”  Counsel was required to convey and explain such material offers to Ford in order to represent her position in good faith.  The D.C. bar rules state:

Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule 1.4–Communication

   (a) A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.
(b) A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.
(c) A lawyer who receives an offer of settlement in a civil case or proffered plea bargain in a criminal case shall inform the client promptly of the substance of the communication.

That rule puts counsel in a difficult place. Michael Bromwich, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks indicated that they are working pro bono but blocked queries as to whether the offer of the Committee was clearly conveyed to their client.  That objection was made despite their effectively telling the Committee that their client would not accept the offer.  The situation is particularly precarious for counsel after Ford admitted that she was given the pro bono counsel at the suggestion and referral of Dianne Feinstein.  That can create concerns over the representational lines, though Katz is a respected litigator and has always fought vigorously for her clients in this area.

The most likely scenario is that Ford was told. Certainly a case can be made for her counsel that she watched coverage making the offer clear, even if she did not get clarity from counsel.  This conflict would ordinarily trigger probing questions over the basis of past representations. However, there was a clear decision not to press Ford on such conflicts due to the bad optics even when using a female prosecutor as a buffer between the witness and the all-male GOP senators.

 

393 thoughts on “The Kavanaugh Hearing Leaves Lingering Questions Over Representations Made To The Committee By Counsel”

  1. I hereby demand the FBI investigates the Salem Witch trials from 1692. Because while we all assume that the “witches” were innocent, I am not so sure. Several people actually confessed to being witches!

    I am sure that some of the cows that had been hexed could be located if enough money is spent, and DNA tested for various forms of HooDoo!

    It is just plain wrong to accuse the accusers of lying, just because they were women! They deserve to be believed, and their claims taken seriously!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    3. The FBI will be interviewing all U.S. adult citizens in an age range of 50-70, who were girls & boys between the ages of 10-15 that may have decapitated Barbie & Gi Joe dolls.

    4. Squeeky: you are really behind the times. Have you ever been to Salem, MA? I went there recently. This city has officially taken the position that the witch trials were really nothing more than religious persecution against people who weren’t Puritans, and they disown the vainglory celebrations of witchcraft their city is known for, because it is just plain wrong to trade on this pathetic past. Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      1. I find it interesting that some Republicans are now signing on to a FBI investigation, which may be a consequence of the many holes in Ford’s testimony, a ploy designed not to go after Kavanaugh but instead to weed out perjury of Ford and her legal team, not to mention getting to the bottom of the Democrat’s leaks to the press. Just imagine all the hay that can be made by Republicans when liars in the Senate are exposed. And how ironic that the FBI that tried to deep-six Trump, would now be helping Trump deep-six the midterms for Democrats. Batsh*t crazy? Whatever time that Democrats have bargained for to dream up more dirt on Kavanaugh, is also more time Republicans have to blow up an already weakened, damaged campaign by the Left against Kavanaugh.

        1. I don’t think Jeff Flake, who gives evidence of being the worst sort of sanctimonious White Knight, cares to see Blasey exposed.

          1. If you had watched the hearing on Thursday, then you would know that you’re wrong. If you didn’t watch the hearing on Thursday, then you would not know that you’re wrong. Either you watched the hearing on Thursday or you didn’t. Either you know that you’re wrong or you don’t.

            Anybody and everybody else who actually watched the hearing on Thursday already knows that you’re just-plain flat-out wrong. The only lingering doubt is whether you are thoroughly committed to being and remaining wrong.

      2. Joseph Jones – I was unaware that the Salem Witches were involved in Russian collusion. Now it makes so much more sense. 😉

    6. Kavanaugh voluntarily gave self-incriminating evidence to The SJC and the woman whom Grassley hired to question Ford, Rachel Mitchell. herself, used that evidence against Kavanaugh, only to be promptly cut off and shut out of the questioning by Lindsey Graham, who realized that Kavanaugh had sunk his own nomination, because he did not know that the calendars that he thought were exculpatory were actually incriminating, because he experienced a memory blackout due to thiamine deficiency caused by excessive consumption of alcohol during the assault that Ford alleged against Kavanaugh.

      Remember: Kavanaugh is a lawyer and a Judge. No lawyer, nor any Judge, would voluntarily give incriminating evidence against himself unless he did not know that that evidence was incriminating. And that necessarily means that Mark Judge doesn’t know what he and Kavanaugh did to Ford, either, and for the same reason; namely, they both blacked-out from excessive alcohol consumption.

      This is not difficult to understand. Case closed. If you put Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, anyway, it won’t take very long to get Kavanaugh impeached and removed from the Supreme Court. Cut your losses. Let go. Move on. And stop blathering nonsensical analogies to the Salem Witch trials. Pshaw!

      1. L4B’s record is secure; she need not worry about anyone topping her when her when it comes to blathering nonsense.

        1. On Thursday, July 1st, 1982, Kavanaugh wrote in his calendar that he went to Tobin’s house [“?”] and then to Timmy’s [Tim Gaudet] for skis [“?”] with Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie and “Squi” [Chris Garret]. Three of the six names on the entry for that date are boys whom Dr. Blasey-Ford has alleged to have been at the party in which she was allegedly assaulted. That’s called corroboration. It’s also substantial and credible information with which to launch and investigation beginning with Tim Gaudet and the house in which Tim Gaudet lived in 1982. Although, I’m sure the FBI will also want to find out more about Tobin and Tobin’s house.

          Notice that the truly nonsensical blatherers will soon say something like “First it was four boys, then it was two boys, and now it’s six boys.” No. The six names that Kavanaugh wrote on his calendar entry for July 1st, 1982, do not contradict Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation. The three names that Dr. Blasey-Ford remembers–Judge, PJ and Chris Garrett–plus Kavanaugh corroborate Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation. Whoever Tom and Bernie might be, I’m sure they have nothing more to worry about than an interview with a couple of FBI agents.

            1. Also FTR, Joseph Finsbury presumes that The Bournemouth Strangler was too old in 1982 to have attended a party with drunken prep-school boys.

          2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – having been a teen boy, when you drink with the boys, you drink with the boys. Girls just get in the way. My wife has periodic “girl’s nights” and I do not feel left out, I would get in the way.

            This date does not confirm Chrissy being there. She was there in 1984 according to her original statement. Remember, four boys, she is late teens? What we want are Chrissy’s diaries. Where are those?

            1. PC Schulte,..
              The July 1, 1982 entry indicates that Kavanaugh names SIX other boys at the gathering, meaning seven boys, not four.
              I won’t try to explain the difference between seven and four to L4B, any more than I would try to convince her that 2+2= 4 if she insisted otherwise.
              There is no mention of Ford’s friend Ms. Keyser at the gathering.
              “Timmy’s” house was 11 miles from the country club, not “close to” the club as Dr. Ford described the location.
              All of these factors undermine the “July 1 theory”, but L4B and others will continue to selectively present half-truths to “make it” ( the theory) work.
              Maybe we’ll get a “thiamine deficiency” diagnosis for Ms. Keyser as well, to explain why she remembers no such gathering.

        2. If one goes back in time one finds that most of what Diane says is later proven untrue. I showed that awhile back recounting one of her idiotic arguments about police risk. We could do that about almost any consistent arguments she has made that are controversial. She probably tops the blog on the number of times she has been proven wrong.

        3. Tom Nash – agree, +100,000,000%

          BTW, got your email, so that email address is good.

      2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – to impeach Justice Kavanaugh, they will have to put Dr. Kavanaugh on the stand. She will not withstand cross-examination. Rameriz story has fallen apart and Swetnik has yet to put up. We are hearing a lot of talk from Avenatti, but we are not seeing the walk.

  2. I noticed that her attorneys did not seem to have communicated this offer to her, but I do agree that she could have been in a media blackout and not known. Then again, she said she would have hosted the Committee and staff, so does that mean she did not go into hiding? What is the penalty for this?

    1. No penalty. Democrats only get prosecuted for grossly comic things, like having a chest freezer full of cash in your basement.

    1. Her contention is that he mischaracterized how he interacted with girls in high school. She didn’t actually know him at the time, she knew him later at Catholic University and is basing her contention on a single conversation about a single incident.

      You cannot keep your grip on the cliff, Diane. You’ll soon be falling falling falling….

      1. Come and get me Copper! I’m not going out alone.

        But you leave anonymous alone. You hear me, Tabarrok? You dirty rat, you!

    2. anon steadfastly follows Bob Dylan’s advice, searching for Commies under every rock.

  4. Who agrees to take a polygraph test on the day of her grandmother’s funeral?

    Ford said she couldn’t tell her parents about her claims but she talks to folks on the beach about it?

    She claims she can’t fly because she’s claustrophobic yet flies all the time. Then she claims she didn’t know the judiciary committee offered to fly to her. She doesn’t read the papers or watch the news? This was covered everywhere.

    The list goes on……

    1. Barbara………In my opinion she is a calculating actor. Probably something in her past made her this way….my guess, she was sexually abused by a family member. But something made her not normal and very calculating.
      The supposed incident with Brett is such a blip on any radar. She’s still traumatized by THAT?! That’s ridiculous and totally unbelievable!
      You would see more sexual interaction if a dog humps your leg!!

      1. Amen to that! What girl hasn’t had a teenage boy fumble around and grab her boobs???

        A life changing trauma??? How utterly laughable! About as serious as Al Franken pretending to grab that chick’s boobs on the plane. Which, I think was way way overblown.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Squeeky – I am tossed on the Franken photo. I wondered if they had waited a second more if he would have had his hands on her boobs. However, I was glad to see him out of the Senate, I won’t lie to you. Still, it seemed like not a lot to go on. Maybe there were more pictures on the roll?

            1. Squeeky. My daughter and I both thought the picture was funny. And he was a performer at the time, not a Senator…..he was trying to be funny, but America has lost its sense of humor, thanks to the Left.

  5. Before she went public I was against the dems bringing up Ford because it’s so dated and they had the evidence for some time. Now that she’s gone public I’ve changed my mind. Two things of note, 1 she requested they not go public, 2 she sent the letter the moment he made the short list not once he was the candidate. Given the former it makes sense why the Democrats waited, given the latter and the way she conducted herself during testimony in contrast with Kavanaugh’s boisterous outrage (who btw admitted he refused to watch her testimony) does make her seem trustworthy.

    And while the president has a horrible record on sexual assault this is more about trustworthiness. We trust the president to be a horrible person who says he can shoot someone and people will vote for him. Kavanaugh presenter himself the sheep and it is now apparent he’s the wolf to most who Grassley, graham etc were always going to force a vote on this week if Ford came with anything less than polaroids of Kavanaugh mounting her.

    1. Kavanaugh has already unwittingly incriminated himself and Mark Judge. If Senate Republicans confirm Kavanaugh anyway, he will not stay on The Court for too much more than one session. And the hue and cry for Kavanaugh’s recusal on just about every last case on the docket for Kavanaugh’s one and only session on The Court will be deafening. Not to mention that the Bush-era documents on Kavanaugh are going to come out no matter what happens to Kavanaugh. Republicans need to cut their losses and chuck Kavanaugh overboard. He’s an albatross around their necks.

  6. Ford’s attorneys, Boris and Natasha, hovered over her like witches watching their brew. Of course the “She can’t fly” story didn’t fly and was made up. But the good doctor Ford was in on it, IMO. She is not the demure, terrified little bunny……she is a calculating opportunist, and an experienced one. I was head of an organization years ago that educated and supported women with severe PMS. I dealt with so many distraught women and their myriad of problems. In my opinion, Ford is a phony. And now she’s a rich phony.

    1. Boris and Natasha? Jesssh. Go back to watching the Cartoon Channel. Her attorneys advised her and spoke for her very infrequently.

      1. Hey Wally……Read much? I said I thought Ford was in on the whole thing. My favorite part was when Boris had to “show” her how to raise her hand to be sworn in!! HELLO!!. What a laughable theatrical farce.
        BTW….You do know there’s no Santa Claus, right? Oh, gee… I hope I didn’t spoil it for ya.

          1. Paul C. WOW Thank you for this! I knew I wasn’t crazy!
            Seriously, I am impressed with the body language professional and appreciate your posting this!

            1. Cindy Bragg – get on her subscribe list and click the bell so you get notifications. She is worth it. I wish I could afford her lessons. 😉

              1. Paul C. I’ll do that! Thank you.
                Hubby says that the study of body language is a real and serious thing. It helps him often with witnesses voir dire.

    2. “Ford’s attorneys, Boris and Natasha, hovered over her like witches watching their brew.”
      *************************
      Ford couldn’t fly but I bet her two lawyers have lots of broom miles between them!

          1. mespo….lol love it. And that reminds me, is it time to tell the Democrats that there really isn’t a Wizard? That it’s Frank Morgan? It’s gonna kill ’em.

      3. mespo……..Hubby did not get to watch much and only saw Rachel Mitchell at the end of Ford’s testimony. He said that personally, he would have been aggressive because of too many loose ends and inconsistencies.

  7. It was odd and very suspicious. Allowed extra time to hope others would come forward it seems. He was fighting to be heard immediately.

  8. I, myself, have been accused of a sex crime which I did not do. And, yes, it affected my relationship with my family for decades. Decades later the family figured out that they couldn’t identify a single person who was my “victim.”

    In the case of accusation of a sex crime there must be different standards imposed. One witness for one event is not a proof of anything. It is well known that sex offenders do not stop. There will be, indeed, must be, multiple events. In this scenario the single-event rapist would “get away with it.”

    I saw on TV today that upwards of 90% of rapes claimed in the last decade in New York City were bogus. In the US as a whole the claim was that the figure was much lower. Only 41%.

    Nevertheless that means that 4 out of 10 accused rapists are not guilty.

    In addition, it is well known (see Satanic babysitter scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria) that therapeutic memory recall cannot be trusted. There is too much chance that the therapist’s suggestions made an event that did not happen real to the patient.

    1. How awful that must have been for you. So you can understand how awful and outrageous it is that the Dems are now going around saying that not only is Kavanaugh a liar, but that women will “unleash hell” on him and the Dem operatives intend to destroy him:

      “If Senate GOP ignores Dr. Blasey Ford and tries to muscle an attempted rapist onto the Supreme Court:
      1. They will pay dearly this November.
      2. Senators up in 2020 (Collins, Gardner et al) will feel intense heat for next two years.
      3. Kavanaugh will not serve for life.”

      -Brian Fallon (former aide to Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Eric Holder)

    2. Anonymous………That’s terrible that you were falsely accused. What an awful experience.

    3. Anonymous:

      “The charge of rape is easily made, but almost impossible to defend” is a legal maxim of the common law. That’s why the law requires a presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The existence of these safeguards stops frivolous charges and the devastating investigations that always accompanies them. Glad you benefited from the good sense of some ancient Englishmen.

      1. Kavanaugh’s prep school calendars incriminate Kavanaugh. Did you miss that? Why would a lawyer and a Judge volunteer incriminating evidence against himself? Because Kavanaugh did not know that his calendars incriminate him. Because Kavanaugh was blacked-out at the time that he assaulted Blasey-Ford. And so was Mark Judge.

          1. Trump ordered an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh most likely because Kavanaugh’s calendars corroborate Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh. There’s now substantial and credible information about time and place to warrant an FBI investigation. July 1st, 1982, at Tim Gaudet’s house. There’s no way that Kavanaugh gives that evidence up if A) his memory of that day and date were intact and B) he knows that he didn’t sexually assault Christine Blasey on July 1st, 1982 at Tim Gaudet’s house. If, however, Tim Gaudet, PJ, Squi [Chris Garrett] or possibly Bernie and Tom can revive Kavanaugh’s memory of that day and date, and if Kavanaugh did not sexually assault Christine Blasey, then the FBI just might be able to clear Kvanaugh’s good name.

            Otherwise, your impersonation of Mark Judge’s maniacal laughter might come back to haunt you, Counselor.

            1. Correction: And if B) Kavanaugh knows that he did sexually assault Christine Blasey Ford . . .

              Sorry about that. Even so, the point remains that Kavanaugh doesn’t know he did to Christine Blasey at Tim Gaudet’s house on Thursday July 1st, 1982. And neither does Mark Judge. And none of the other boys in the house know what Kavanaugh and Judge did in the bedroom with Christine Blasey. And that, therefore, Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford is now, was at the time, and has been ever since then and now, the only person who could have told Kavanaugh what he and Judge had done to her.

              1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – where was Chrissy on the night of July 1, 1982?

            2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – I heard they are looking at Chrissy 2nd front door and who uses it.

        2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – I am missing the part where his calendars incriminate him?

    1. Yeah, as soon as he realized that Kavanaugh had unwittingly incriminated himself, Graham interrupted Rachel Mitchell and took over the questioning so that Mitchell would not drive the last nail in Kavanaugh’s nomination coffin. Saving Kavanaugh from himself is impossible. But saving Kavanaugh from the woman whom Senate Republicans hired to save Kavanaugh from himself is, indeed, brilliant simplicity.

  11. On both sides, of the accused and of the accuser, there are mechanisms at work that have ulterior motives. For the Democrats it is to get rid of Kavanaugh so Trump would be forced to nominate a more reasonable candidate as far as the Left goes. For the Republicans it is to take their majority and vote Kavanugh in, as they have stated, regardless of the outcome of the hearings. In either case, the missing ingredient is a thorough investigation.

    One fact is evident throughout. There are many ‘witnesses’ with conflicting statements that have yet to be investigated by the FBI as would be the case if it were not for the Republican majority that orchestrated this farce. An FBI investigation would not delay the vote past November. It could be done well in advance of any potential change to the Senate. An FBI investigation would either place Kavanaugh in the position of having sufficient witnesses to back up his claims of never being there or illustrating that he is a liar. If found innocent this would be an overwhelmingly powerful win for the Republicans to take into the November elections. If found guilty, a more centrist right wing judge would be the result.

    As it turns out the system failed. This was nothing more than a rigged circus of a foregone conclusion. Kavanaugh ranted, raved, and side stepped questions-when asked if he would be for an independent FBI investigation, he constantly on every occasion did not answer yes or no but simply waited it out with ‘I am innocent’. Kavanaugh presented himself as a sleazy lawyer avoiding questions. As a judge he would have placed himself in contempt for not answering a yes/no question as instructed.

    This was about a system and the system failed. The US system, with two parties, one more than a dictatorship, just placed itself on par with Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other autocratic systems. The verdict was given before the hearing.

    The hypocrisy of this system is rank. Turley contributes to the smell by focusing on discrepancies that have nothing to do with the missing element, a thorough FBI investigation of this issue.

    1. There would have been (as came out in the hearing) an “investigation” had the accusation been presented in a closed hearing protecting the privacy of the accuser.

      Holding this until the last moment as a delaying tactic is not a justice-seeking move. It is political ploy.

    2. Isaac, again you say this: “For the Democrats it is to get rid of Kavanaugh so Trump would be forced to nominate a more reasonable candidate as far as the Left goes.”. You are deluded.iI ain’t gonna happen, even if Kavanaugh doesn’t get the votes.

    3. What a dweeb! You want to waste the FBI investigating some hormonal, lying b*tch over some highly questionable claims of boob-grabbing at a teenage party nearly 40 years ago???

      An investigation that isn’t going to be able to prove anything one way or another???

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. So, let’s update the list of hatees, shall we? Blacks, browns, yellows, foreigners, Democrats, moderate Republicans, and women. Haha. Isn’t this how it always ends up for your types? Hunted and alone in a bunker with a dead wife and a loaded pistol. Perhaps the results are dictated by the previous?

        this is to squeeKKK

        1. Fake School Girl didn’t watch the hearing on Thursday. So she doesn’t know that Kavanaugh’s prep-school calendars incriminate Kavanaugh and corroborate Blasey-Ford’s testimony to The SJC. The really fascinating question is whether a person who so obviously suffered a bout of temporary amnesia due to excessive consumption of alcohol can be charged with perjury for denying what he honestly cannot remember. I suspect that the answer is no. Amnesia ought to be an affirmative defense against perjury. As for the other lies Kavanaugh told . . . tick tock tick tock tick tock . . .

          1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – you are trying too hard.

    4. “and side stepped questions-when asked if he would be for an independent FBI investigation,”

      Yes. He didn’t embrace a delay of his own confirmation to the Supreme Court, a delay which might very well drag out until after the midterm elections and cause him not to be confirmed, as is the intention of Democrats. How utterly despicable of him, and very clear evidence of guilt, obviously.

      1. The man voluntarily, unknowingly, unwittingly incriminated himself with evidence that he mistakenly presumed to be exculpatory because he had experienced temporary amnesia due to thiamine deficiency caused by excessive consumption of alcohol and so did Mark Judge. And nobody else who was in Timmy’s house with them was in the room with Kavanaugh and Judge. So no one else other than Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford could tell Kavanaugh and Judge what Kavanaugh and Judge did to Christine Blasey.

        That will all come out in the FBI investigation that Trump has ordered thanks to Senator Flake and to the woman who changed Flake’s mind with her heartfelt protest at the elevator door. Most likely Kavanaugh’s nomination will be withdrawn. If not, then Kavanaugh will not be confirmed. If confirmed, Kavanaugh would be impeached and removed from The Court before the end of his one and only session as an Associate Justice.

        Time to pull the plug on this nominee.

          1. TBob … doesn’t… understand … what irrelevant means.

            (But Kavanaugh does. He also knows what incriminating and corroborating mean. What Kavanaugh clearly doesn’t know is exactly what happened at Tim Gaudet’s house on July 1st, 1982. Because he and Judge experienced temporary amnesia due to excessive alcohol consumption.)

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – when you go into an alcoholic blackout you function normally, but you do not remember what you have done. It is different from drinking until you pass out.

              From my own experience, I used to drink in a bar where one of the patrons was prone to blackouts. You knew when he was in a blackout when he suddenly acted very sober and friendly. He was friendly anyway, but guarded when drinking normally. In his blackouts he did not stagger or act drunk in any way. This would belie Chrissy’s description of the attempted groping by two very drunk guys. Or four very drunk guys.

        2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – that would be the women who bullied Flake. If men had done that to DiFi, you would be having a meltdown. It is the only time I have actually felt sorry for Jeff Flake. It was a setup and we both know it. You want to insert that clip you think is so important, I must have gone for a potty break.

    5. How would that “thorough FBI investigation” go? You know that Kavanaugh has held a Top Secret clearance that gave him access to the Nuclear Codes, right?

      FBI: Christine Blasey Ford said you were at a party almost 40 years ago where she was assaulted by Brett and Mark. Were you?

      Witness: What party? At who’s house? When?

      FBI: We don’t know. That’s what we are investigating. But it was about 36 years ago.

      FBI: Do you recall being at a party where your friend, Christine, abruptly left because she had been assaulted by Brett K?

      Witness: I don’t recall any such party.

      FBI: Christine said you were there, Leland. It was the party where she does not know how she got there or how she got home. And she was assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh.

      Witness: I don’t know Brett Kavanaugh. Never met him. Never at a party with him.

      FBI: It was the party where your friend Christine said she remembers that she only had “one beer,” was assaulted by Brett K and Mark J. and then abruptly left the scene, leaving you there without a goodbye. And she does not know how she got home.

      Witness: I don’t remember ever being at such party or hearing about such an incident.

      FBI: It was the party at someone’s house, somewhere in Maryland, sometime during high school. Your friend Christine abruptly left the party, leaving you, her friend, in a house with two very drunk boys who attempted to rape her? She left you there. Do you remember that party?

      Witness: No. I don’t even know Brett K.

      Is this how you think a “thorough FBI investigation” is going to go?

      Each other witness named by Ford has the same answer. They do not recall such a party or hearing about any assault.

      Should the FBI go back and interview every single student from both of their high schools to ask if any of them recalls ever “hearing” about such a party or assault nearly 40 years ago?

      I mean, explain this to me, because I don’t understand what you think would happen with the FBI “investigating” this any more than the investigators on the Judiciary Committee have done. Or anymore than 6 thorough FBI background investigations that cleared him to have access to the Nuclear Codes?

      1. TBob……. good assessment!

        When my brother was about to enter the FBI in 1966. the Bureau did a full field investigation of him, of course. And believe me, they were thorough.
        When my husband was joining the Peace Corps in 1969, the FBI did a full field investigation, even though he was at that time a Capitol Hill Policeman in DC. He had graduated from Baylor U the year before, so they sent an agent to Waco to investigate his college years.
        My point is, those FBI investigations are THOROUGH. Brett Kavanaugh has had six, as we know. Something would have turned up, believe me, if he had done anything close to these accusations.

        1. Yup…We know Kavanaugh has been cleared and given access to top secret info and the nuclear codes…and now the FBI is investigating Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations. One has to wonder not so much what they will find about Judge Kav, but what the feds might find out about Chrissy Ford…hmmm…

    6. “This was about a system and the system failed. The US system, with two parties, one more than a dictatorship”
      ******************************

      Just pricelessly stupid.

    7. Issac, your idea of a fair hearing is without evidence to destroy the character of a gentleman over an issue that likely never occurred, wasn’t a crime and is 36 years too late.

      You sound like a chronic procrastinator that never gets anything done because there is always something someone else has to do (not you) before making a decision.

  12. I watched every moment of the marathon hearing, and my sense of Dr Ford was that she was—for whatever reason—not driving her own defense. She was unaware of the polygraph charges, unaware of whether she was videotaped, unaware if therapy notes had been given to WaPo or merely summarized, and —shockingly for a PhD—unaware of the meaning of “exculpatory” or whether someone was working “on her behalf.” She was likeable, pleasant, believable, but in my mind not altogether “there.” Perhaps she was on some kind of an anxiety medication, which would be understandable. Not sure, but there was definitely something “off” for me. Anyone else feel that way?

    2. She was likely rattled because she was testifying before the Senate on live t.v., as the whole country watched. Jeez, who wouldn’t be?

    3. Agreed. It’s a reasonable wager that Dianne Swinestein’s staff referred her to Debra Katz and that Katz is being paid by a cut-out for George Soros or Tom Steyer. Katz, Schumer, and Sweinstein have been running this sh!t show.

      1. You have become overly accustomed to the unwarranted presumption that none of your adversaries will ever remember any of the incomparably nincompooperish stances you have adopted on this blawg. Good luck with that.

        1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – the irony of that statement. 😉 Have you looked at yourself hard in the mirror lately? Do you think that when you leave this blawg we are going feel a rift in the force. Hell, no.

  13. Mark Judge’s reluctance to testify may have NOTHING to do with protecting Kavanaugh. I infer that he is protecting himself.

    1. How about something simpler: he’s a private citizen who does not wish to be on display and does not want the mediaswine taking a dumpster dive through his life. He has nothing to do with any of this. He’s a school chum of Judge Kavanaugh that Blasey elected to use as a character in her FanFiction.

    2. Judge is obviously protecting himself. He was not merely a “witness,” but in fact a participant in the alleged assault. There’s no way he is going to voluntarily appear and testify under oath.

      1. He’s already signed an affidavit.

        No he wasn’t a ‘participant’ We know that with reasonable certainty because every other person supposedly present has said they knew nothing of any such incident. Her chum Leland Keyser among them has signed a statement saying she’s not acquainted with any Brett Kavanaugh and never was. The smart money says Blasey knows Judge only from reading his memoirs.

      2. TIN, why are you so sure Judge was a participant when there is no significant legal evidence other than generic statements that can neither be proven or disproven?

          1. Mark Judge knows that he experienced temporary amnesia at Timmy’s house on July 1st, 1982, IIRC. He does not know from his own recollection what he and Kavanaugh did to Christine Blasey. And neither do the other people in Timmy’s house with them, because they were not in the room with Kavanaugh, Judge and Christine Blasey. However, the other people at Timmy’s house on July 1st, 1982, IIRC, may have told either or both Judge and Kavanaugh something else about their behavior at Timmy’s house on July 1st, 1982, IIRC.

            P. S. TIN has been a stalwart of cautious consideration in the case of Blasey-Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh. Mespo does himself a disservice to find fault with TIN on that count.

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – what were you doing July 1, 1982? BTW, stop practicing medicine without a license. You are practicing malpractice.

  14. It sounds like it was Dr. Ford’s lawyers who did not want to travel to California. Which is understandable; it’s a long trip and someone would have had to pay for their travel time.

    1. Her grandmother had just been buried! Good grief….your boy was crying and crying. How dare someone question him! He’s the chosen of God or the GOP he is infallible and pure as the driven snow. And by the way when he fell asleep drunk…it wasn’t a black out. If he want a fair process he would have welcomed and FBI investigation.

      2. I’m not sure what to say about his performance but it sure isn’t what I expect from a judge – temper tantrums, crying, shouting, extreme partisan, attacking groups, attacking individual Senators, bringing up Clinton. I don’t care that he doesn’t like Clinton, but this wasn’t the time or place to wrap other things around that dislike. We got a very different look at his temperament. He also has no trouble telling lies. I don’t think he belongs on any federal bench and most certainly not the Supreme Court.

      3. “If he want a fair process he would have welcomed and FBI investigation.”
        *******************************
        In a fair process, Feinstein wouldn’t have held the allegation for 20 days and asked for one herself.

        1. mespo – in a fair process DiFi would have asked him about the contents of the letter 20 days ago instead of having a staffer leak it to the press.

      4. Holm, your statements make it sound as if you were there and experienced the same things Ford experienced. That is the problem with all your comments. They are based on you want the world to be not what the world is and the facts are.

      1. Allan – it is possible she committed perjury, she sure did enough acting trying to get her way. She might have been on the East Coast the entire time.

        1. Guilt can lead one to accuse others in order to heal a trauma or rid themselves of self inflicted guilt. This leads to a lot of inconsistencies and generic accusations that change so that the story line behind the emotional challenge becomes more acceptable to the person. Sometimes with a trauma it is better to redirect the story to a more palatable story where one might actually make up details in order to heal the wound.

          Off the top of my head you might want to read “Redirect” by Wilson (Mespo might as well or another similar book) as it can explain how this works. My interest in this is that after a trauma police, social workers and others want the individual to recall the trauma when perhaps it is better to wait and let the one traumatized recall the trauma in a more palatable way. If one understands that and Ford with her training should, then one recognizes that no matter what Ford says or even what a polygraph says her trauma might have been completely different than the trauma she has stated.

  15. The desperation amongst Republicans is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

    Listen up: Kavanaugh is likely to have experienced a memory blackout due to thiamine deficiency caused by excessive drinking on the occasion of the assault that Dr. Blasey Ford has alleged against Kavanaugh and Judge.

    And you’re all trying to poke pin-pricks in the minutia of Grassley’s offer to the witness because she dared to show up to give her testimony against a mean blackout drunk. “It’s so unfair.”

        2. Read “God and Man at Georgetown Prep” by Mark Judge.
          ********************************
          I had a female classmate my group hung around with write a book about working as a female escort. Maybe I’d look good in stockings and high heels!

    2. L4D, Trump is currently President because he defeated 16 other Republicans and one Democrat. If you think the Republicans won’t see that the Trump voters will use this against them in the next election cycl,e if they fail to confirm him, you are out of your mind.
      Blame Diane Feinstein and her stunt of holding on to Ford’s letter for the current fiasco.
      We shall see.

      1. B. U., Trump has ordered an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh. Trump will almost certainly withdraw Kavanaugh’s nomination once the FBI concludes that investigation. Kavanaugh will not be confirmed before that FBI investigation is complete. If Kavanaugh is confirmed after that FBI investigation has been completed, then Kavanaugh will not likely finish his one and only session as an Associate Justice of The Supreme Court before he is impeached and removed from the bench.

        Trump voters are, of course, perfectly free to destroy themselves, the Republican party and even Trump, himself, if they simply must. There is considerable doubt whether Trump voters are capable of anything else but utter self-destruction along with the permanent demise of everything they’ve always ever wanted for so very long. “It’s so unfair.” This will eventually and inevitably become clear to all Americans other than Trump voters. And it is we who shall save you from yourselves, just as we shall save the Republican party from itself, just as we shall save our beloved country from Trump. You’ll see.

        1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – as a registered Independent, the Democrats have lost me. I had intended to vote for the Democratic candidate for governor but after this even squishy Ducey looks better.

    3. Listen up: Kavanaugh is likely to have experienced a memory blackout due to thiamine deficiency caused by excessive drinking on the occasion of the assault that Dr. Blasey Ford has alleged against Kavanaugh and Judge.
      ******************

      I prefer the equally well-subscribed theory by “Professor” Geraldine “Flip” Wilson that “the devil made him do it.” Similar factual basis for that, too.

      1. Diane and her alters have interesting hobbies. They’ve evidently burgled Robert Mueller’s office and the offices of all of Brett Kavanaugh’s internists from 1979 to the present. I wonder if they’ve noticed the missing files.

          1. mespo……I answered your question about my hubby’s opinion. of Rachel Mitchell, but I had to nest it under another comment somewhere around here…LOL. He didn’t see much of the testimony, but said he would have been aggressive because of all of the obvious inconsistencies…..I think you thought that, too?

            2. If the interrogation was more aggressive and she became less credible we might not have had to do the FBI investigation. I expect more bogus claims as the investigation winds down.

              1. OFCOLA. Rachel Mitchell got Kavanaugh to incriminate himself and corroborate Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh with his own prep-school calendars. The only conceivable explanation for that result is that Kavanaugh did not know that his prep-school calendars were incriminating by way of corroborating his accuser’s allegation against him. The only conceivable explanation for Kavanaugh’s ignorance is that both he and Mark Judge had experienced temporary amnesia due to excessive alcohol consumption while drinking at Timmy’s house on July 1st, 1982, IIRC.

                You know, Allan, you could have actually watched the hearing on Thursday had you wanted actually to watch it. Why else would Lindsey Graham have cut Rachel Mitchell off and shut her out of any further questioning of Kavanaugh the moment Ms. Mitchell got Kavanaugh to incriminate himself with his own evidence by showing how that evidence corroborated Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh?

                1. Diane, you listen to a few things you like and then you embellish them and alter history to make your points. I don’t care what side of the aisle a person is on if they provide reliable information. Your information based on past experience is totally unreliable and if you were a drinker I would call you a confabulator but I don’t want to call you that without knowing if it is true or not. However, you are not all there. There is something quite wrong in your head and I will leave that to your doctors and psychiatrists.

                2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – just exactly how did the calendar incriminate him?

                  Mitchell said she would neither prosecute nor apply for a search warrant based on what she got. What the hell did you get that she, an experienced prosecutor of 26 years, did not get?

  16. I believe her, watched the show all day. What struck me most was the contrast in the behavior of the 2 persons involved, Kavanaugh came across exactly as I would imagine; arrogant, angry, insulted that someone of his class and caliber should even be questioned about such behavior (a poor little privileged rich white boy crybaby). It doesn’t surprise me that Trump would want such a person on the Supreme Court, they both think that women are simply men’s playthings and they, the women, should be grateful for the attention. But the question is, is that the kind of person we want on the highest court of the land? Personally I think not.

    1. “arrogant, angry, insulted” and had he not shown these you would have wrote he was still guilty, with still no evidence.

    2. What strikes me is that you’re too blinkered to notice the two elephant sized holes in her account:

      1. No evidence that she was at all acquainted with either Brett Kavanaugh or Mark Judge in 1982. No snapshots, letters, diary entries, nada. No member of the Blasey household was enrolled at the same school with a member of the Kavanaugh household. There wasn’t any particular reason for the parents to cross paths professionally. They did not live in the same neighborhood (they lived about 8 miles apart). No one has yet emerged to attest that these two had ever been at the same event at the same time. There is a disinterested witness who avers she knew both Blasey and Kavanaugh, but that person made clear that the two were in separate non-intersecting social circles.

      2. Three people she’s named as present during this fanciful ‘assault’ have stated they know nothing of it. Her pal Leland Keyser says in an affidavit that she’s never met Brett Kavanaugh.

      Your manner of assessing this controversy is fundamentally childish.

        1. Burning Tree was and is an all male institution. Christine Blasey has not claimed to have met Kavanaugh there nor could she have: women are debarred from the grounds. It’s conceivable Ralph Blasey met E.E. Kavanaugh at the club. We wouldn’t know for how many years their membership intersected because the membership list is not published. Blasey was the president of the club, but more than 20 years after the supposed events in question.

          What are they going to ‘investigate’, betty? You have one person’s claim that X happened 36 years ago, a claim denied by four other people. There is no other evidence.

          1. DSS – Mitchell told the Republicans on the committee that from what she heard she would not prosecute.

                1. The attack by the left handled publicly was a disservice to the nation. The RINO way of handling things doesn’t make them appear that much better than the average Democrat.

                    2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Remember it cuts both ways.

    3. dlet –

      I would be very angry too if falsely accused of attempted rape, wouldn’t you be?

      What I came away with is that Ford honestly believes that Kavanaugh was the perp, but she is mistaken. The scale-tippers are her good friend Leland’s contradiction of Ford’s testimony that Leland knew Kavanaugh – Leland says she does not know him – and Leland’s denial (or at least failure to remember) that she was at the house when the attack happened.

      Not that I like Kavanaugh’s legal bent.

      1. What I came away with is that Ford honestly believes that Kavanaugh was the perp, but she is mistaken.

        Why did you come away with that? Try this: what is the evidence the two ever met?

        1. Dr. Blasey-Ford says that Chris Garrett (a.k.a. “Squi” in Kavanaugh’s calendars) introduced Christine Blasey to his circle of friends. “Squi” is named on Kavanaugh’s calendar entry for Thursday July 1st, 1982, along with Judge, PJ, Tom and Bernie. That calendar entry also states that Kavanaugh went to Tobin’s house. Then Kavanaugh went to Timmy’s [Tim Gaudet] for “skis” [?] with Judge, PJ, Tom, Bernie and “Squi” (a.k.a. Chris Garrett).

          BTW, this was all covered at Thursday’s hearing.

    4. In this great country of ours everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Just because you say it is so doesn’t make it so. Without credible evidence to support a 36 year old claim all you have is an accusation. Nothing more and nothing less. Try for just a second to remove your bias, political motivation, anger toward men, issues with class, and imagine what it might feel like to be accused of something you did not do but you find yourself being crucified in the media and the court of public opinion and there isn’t one shred of proof that would fly in a court of law that you are guilty of what you are accused of. You might not like Kavanaugh (I would assume you have never met him, know nothing about him as a person other than what you have read or seen in the media – and we know how unbiased that is) and it sounds like you despise the President BUT don’t for one second think you would not be ANGRY, FRUSTRATED, and incredibly INCENSED if you were accused of something that you know is false and people blindly accepted the accusation without any need for evidence. If you say you wouldn’t react in a similar way you are dishonest.

    5. and Ford “came across” as an expert in psychology who knew when to invoke a “shaky voice” and emotion. she was NOT cross-examined effectively. I do not say that she was intruthful, but I have my doubts as to gaps in her story and recollection. ABC, NBC et al selectively quote her “100% sure” testimony but do not, even once, mention his “100% sure” testimony. Selective and biased media coverage is the real problem.

      1. Lin,..
        – You expressed ” doubts as to gaps in her story and recollection”.
        Subsequently, our resident expert on thiamine deficiency and everything else explained possible reasons for those gaps, which of course she only applied to Kavanaugh.
        But as long as that theory has been put on the table re Kavanaugh, who claims no glaring memory gaps, let’s try it out on someone whose memory gaps are big enough to drive a truck through.

        1. Tom Nash – you are not actually going there are you? You are not saying the cute, pretty Chrissy drank herself into an alcoholic blackout and cannot remember the evening? I am surprised that our resident doctor L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark did not pick up on this.

          1. PC Schulte,…
            It seemed ironic that L4Yoga would use the alcohol-induced “thiamine deficiency” to explain blackout(s) for Kavanaugh only, who claims no loss of memory.
            I’m sure that as a fair-minded person 😒 L4D would use her expertise in this area to explain the huge gaps in memory for Ford, who DOES claim memory loss.

            1. Tom Nash – you don’t suppose that L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark is basing her suppositions on personal experience, do you?

    6. Exactly how would you react if someone accused you of rape and caused your wife and children to receive death threats?

  17. I have followed every detail of this saga with an objective learning lens. I have no legal background, only a background in psychology (MA, LLP, LPC). I do not think there is enough corroborating evidence, including her statements about the incident, it’s severity and interpretation of said event to convince me that Judge Brett Kavanaugh criminally assaulted her.

    1. I don’t think any reasonable person would question the severity of the assault and its impact on Dr. Ford’s life. The only question is whether the assailant was Kavanaugh. It’s possible that it was Mark Judge and someone else, whom she mistakenly believes was K. Personally, I believe it was Kavanaugh, but would give him the benefit of the doubt due to (1) reasonable doubt, (2) his age at the time of the alleged assault, (3) the passage of time with no other reported serious misconduct, (4) his exemplary academic and professional record, and (5) that as a practical matter, the alternatives are likely worse. I would much rather see K on the SCOTUS than Amy Coney Barrett, for example. It’s quite possible that he did what he is accused of as a drunken teenager, but is no longer the same person.

      1. I don’t think any reasonable person would question the severity of the assault and its impact on Dr. Ford’s life.

        That’s because you’re not a reasonable person. You don’t know how a reasonable person thinks. There are simply no coarse indicia of trauma in Blasey’s biography. None. She may have scar tissue, but that doesn’t require trauma and people get through life passably with it.

        2. You’ve shown yourself to be completely unhinged when it comes to Dr. Ford. You will not, cannot, acknowledge anything, and I mean anything, positive about her. You discredit her academic and professional accomplishments and you discredit her life experiences. According to you, she’s a liar about anything and everything. You’ve shown to be utterly irrational in your assessment of this unfortunate situation. I suspect you are angry because she’s a female and is more academically and professionally accomplished than you. Too bad. Fortunately, most of the world has passed you by.

          1. I haven’t commented on her academic papers at all. I don’t read psychology papers.

            Yes, she’s lying. The indicators are there. She’s accused Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge of assaulting her. She made this accusation 36 years after the fact in the course of a political maneuver. There’s no reason to conclude she’s ever met either man and her account of the event has been protean and coheres poorly. She’s also lied about ancillary matters through her attorneys and at the hearing (the fear-of-flying BS).

            I have nothing to say about her ‘life experiences’ bar that they show no coarse indicators of trauma. I am objecting to her adding fictional elements to her memoir in order to defame someone for political reasons.

      3. “I don’t think any reasonable person would question the severity of the assault and its impact on Dr. Ford’s life. ”

        How old are you? You sound totally inexperienced with regard to social affairs.

        1. He/She claims to be a 58 year old lawyer who (if I’m not mistaken) has served in the military.

          1. DSS, It’s possible, but TIN’s “reasonable person” seems limited to a minority of people that exist in real life. The military is not a guaranteur of wide experiences.

            1. TIN has been a veritable paragon of judicious reasoning and cautious deliberation in the case of Dr. Blasey-Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh.

              Allan has no depth finder and thus remains ignorant of the fact that he is not in TIN’s league. Fortunately for Allan, he’s such a small fry that TIN can’t be bothered to swallow Allan whole. L4D has not yet developed a refined palate like TIN’s.

              1. Diane, TIN’s reasoning has been garbage. If TIN”s statements meant anything she would have provided the evidence to back up her statements that were not factually based. That you say ” L4D has not yet developed a refined palate like TIN’s.” is probably true to some extent, but TIN’s palate is very low level so that leaves you at the bottom of the heap where you belong.

              2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – you need a basic writing class. You are mixing your metaphors. And the metaphors you are using really don’t make sense to anyone except you.

    1. Did you watch the same hearing I did? The judge was screaming and crying! He was unable to control himself for even a few minutes. His Republican defenders like Lindsay Graham reacted too….screaming and making angry faces as if that proved them right. Kavanaugh is unfit to be on the highest court in the land but sadly the Republicans don’t care about the Court or the Country. As Lindsay told us only the big donors matter.

      1. He’s been a federal appellate judge for 12 years and written hundreds of opinions. Why not come up with a non-stupid argument?

        1. https://abovethelaw.com/2018/09/remember-that-time-brett-kavanaugh-said-polygraphs-are-important-in-making-hiring-decisions/

          Excerpt:

          Joe Patrice
          ✔
          @JosephPatrice
          This is a good time to remind everyone that Brett Kavanaugh has ruled that polygraphs can be accepted as gospel by employers in making hiring decisions.

          11:15 AM – Sep 27, 2018

          Yes, as a judge, Brett Kavanaugh has been all about polygraph tests in making hiring decisions. I guess he only approves of them when other people are getting hired. While he’s not written on the value of polygraph results per se, he’s approvingly cited the technology more than once.

          Brett Kavanaugh is prepared to stand for the proposition that “there’s a law for thee but not for me.” That should be a disqualifying characteristic in a Supreme Court justice.

          Of course, among the many disqualifying factors floating around, this one will get lost in the shuffle. -end of excerpt

          1. Employers can even be stupid Anonymous so as an employer you could deny an employee a job for any stupid reason you wish as long as it isn’t discriminatory against certain classes of people.

          2. anonymous – the way Chrissy’s polygraph was structured, she might as well not as taken one.

    2. She doesn’t appear unstable at all. She has an ugly voice, a mild weight problem, and the bad taste to color her hair (bad taste manifest also in her eyewear). This is a calculated smear on her part in the service of her political views and professional interests. Did you catch the few studies on which she was the lead author? They were on the effects of RU-486.

      1. Wow! ‘An ugly voice, a mild weight problem, and bad taste in hair and eyeglasses?’ You are completely, crazily obsessed with tearing this woman apart, inch by inch. I thought you were a stalker when you were researching and posting the occupation of Judge Kavanaugh’s wife’s grandfather (!), but even noticing, and then posting, criticisms of Dr. Ford’s voice, weight, hair and eyewear outs you as a complete loon!

        1. You’re projecting TIN. You’ve made one silly argument after another promoting her (including the argument that person A making an accusation is to be taken seriously while person B denying it is to be ignored because he is an interested party). I’ve made variations on two arguments:

          1. There are no coarse indicators of trauma in her life.

          2. There has been no evidence produced to date that she was acquainted with Mark Judge or Brett Kavanaugh in 1982, 1985, or any other time. The people she identified as being present during her trauma have all denied being there.

    3. A woman with more than sixty peer-reviewed articles in her chosen profession is held to be “unstable” by a “person” who spells Democrat with three capital letters K, who is named after a Latin phrase followed by a superstitious number and whose avatar is a photo negative of a nude woman.

      Granted, hocuspocus13 is “confused.” But has hocuspocus13 been “used” and “abused”???

  19. It was not explained how an offer to fly to her in California was not “clear.”

    It’s clear that she’s a liar and an obfuscator. It’s clear she lied about her fear of flying to delay the process and prevent a vote on Kavanaugh.

    1. Curri,…
      – If you have seen the movie “Midnight Run” and remember the Charles Grodin character, you’ll have a better understanding of how and why the fear of flying conveniently comes and goes. 😀😂

      1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – again, I must ask, are you speaking from experience?

Comments are closed.