Kavanaugh Hearings a National Disgrace

[ramus]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/do...ony-2018-09-27

This stinks to high heaven, she conveniently mentions after a slow pitch, the Gofundme in the hearings.

"Ford said she has incurred security costs that crowd-funding and some of her wealthy friends and associates in Palo Alto, California, are helping to pay." She forgot to mention the democratic party also.

I don't need to tell you to read between the lines ...... bribe in plain view ...

Oh by the way I was forced to have sex with Kavanaugh too, where is my money, i'm scared, have children, how much do I get... I can't remember when or where this took place but I'm 100% sure it happen in the eighties at night on a week day in the United States in a house.

$305,000.00 are you seeing this.....


During Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, under questioning about how she was paying security and legal costs, Ford said some of it could be covered by GoFundMe accounts that have been started to help her.

Her mention of the crowd-funding website caused the authenticated GoFundMe webpage helping her to take off. It jumped from about $179,000 to $305,000 and counting merely 30 minutes later, according to the publicly displayed funds counter.

The lawyers who flanked her in the hearing, Michael Bromwich and Debra Katz, told the senators they were working pro bono and had no expectation of being paid. Ford, under questioning, said Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office referred her to Katz’s law firm.

Ford said she has incurred security costs that crowd-funding and some of her wealthy friends and associates in Palo Alto, California, are helping to pay.

[ramus]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/27/gofu...ord-costs.html

GoFundMe campaigns have raised more than $500,000 to cover Blasey Ford's costs .

[Arcturian108]

I just checked today, Friday, and at 12:30 pm East Coast time the fund is close to $500,000.

I watched the whole show yesterday, and have a slight headache today from too much television-viewing. My immediate take on Dr. Ford when she first started speaking was her little girl voice. From my experience with clients over the years, that suggests to me that she was a very protected, daddy's little girl. I am not a trained psychologist, so that is simply my opinion. That she was so frightened at age 15 of being groped, not "sexually assaulted" as everyone keeps repeating, suggests again that she had some kind of pre-existing fear, from either this lifetime, or a previous lifetime. But of course this would never come up in this kind of attack by allegation.

I happened to have spent my high school years in the same area of Maryland that was being discussed, and Judge Kavanaugh even mentioned playing basketball at my high school.

[greybeard]

I was sexually assaulted by an older woman when I was fifteen.
She was seventeen
I did not invite it I did not expect it.
Ok that was my experience and I did not complain later..
It was a "fondle"--grope in other words.
She laughed at my discomfort, embarrassment.
Young hormones --hers --accepted.

So here we have a woman's stated experience--years after the event.
Who knows the truth of what happened without full context all these years ago.
Neither account--his or hers, will bring will bring the truth of what happened without full understanding of the context in which this is claimed to have happened.

Chris

Ps The Eagles have a song "Get over it"
Worth a listen.

[ramus]

$500,000.00 ... makes it easy to get over it.

[Bayareamom]

I have to say this. I viewed the entirety of this hearing yesterday. I found myself completely believing this woman. She seemed forthright, and exhibited the emotions one would expect from someone who has been traumatized, whether long ago or not. I honestly felt that the Republicans were really in a jam after viewing her testimony. But I realized that, to be fair and open-minded, I needed to hear Kavanaugh's testimony. When I listened to him speak and watched his own raw emotions, my heart went out to him as well.

So then, for a short while, I didn't know what to think. I felt they were both extremely credible and that both had given credible testimonies. What to believe...

But then, as I was speaking to a friend of mine afterwards, I suddenly came to a conclusion, which was one I hadn't expected. I remembered that Ford did not recall how she had arrived at this gathering, nor how she arrived back at her parents' home, afterwards. She doesn't recall whose home this alleged event occurred at, nor has she ANY (ANY!) corroborating evidence to support her story. Indeed, the four individuals she states who were there and of whom she states knew what happened, have ALL provided sworn statements, provided under penalty of perjury, that they do NOT recall being at this event. One of these four individuals is her best friend. This friend states that she does not recall being there, but yet states "she believes Ford."

Simply 'believing' someone DOES NOT provide corroborating evidence. And indeed, these four individuals who provided their sworn statements have REFUTED Ford's claims as to having attended this gathering.

So what do we have here? We have a woman who, although she appeared extremely credible (emotionally), has not proven her case whatsoever. She has no corroborating evidence to support her allegation.

I actually found Ford more likable in a way, than I did Kavanaugh. Although my heart went out to Kavanaugh as I viewed his testimony, at times, I felt I could see this sort of anger and belligerence one would see in someone who appears 'entitled.' Just my opinion, but I felt that at times, he was a little too boastful when speaking about both his academic and athletic accomplishments. But I did try to keep all personal bias aside as I viewed his testimony.

In the end, I arrived at the conclusion that I feel any fact finder should arrive at: Ford has absolutely NO CORROBORATING evidence to support her allegation. NONE. TO ME, if you are going to accuse someone of this type of incident, you need to have some corroboration to back up those claims. She had none.

Inasmuch as I found Kavanaugh somewhat distasteful, as an unbiased viewer I have to say that I come down on the side of his testimony. Ford was asked if she understands that in the state in which this alleged event occurred, there is no statute of limitations on this type of crime. In other words, she could still take this case to the police and have it investigated, should she wish. She hasn't done that.

To accuse someone of this type crime, and at this late stage in the nomination process, is despicable to me UNLESS she has the goods to back up her story.

SHE DID NOT.

I am glad to hear that Kavanaugh will most likely be sworn in. Ford, although I have sympathy for her and feel that something may have happened to her all those years ago, has not provided any corroboration for her story. I also believe that the Democratic Party has victimized BOTH Ford and Kavanaugh.

And lest anyone feel I am biased in any way -- I did not vote for Trump, nor do I consider myself a politically motivated individual. I am I suppose what one would call a non-political individual. I will not participate in ANY election because I understand how truly corrupted our political process is. It is a vile and completely corrupted system, from the top, down.

[Satori]

Very well put Bayareamom.

Like Senator Graham said, in the real world of civil and criminal law, this claim would not make it out of the batter's box. You have aptly stated the reasons why it would not, and why it should not have.

This whole fiasco is, at a minimum, a politically motivated operation that turned into a freak show.

[Midnight]

So sad.
Yet another of my formerly favourite sites has turned into a Trump groupie site.
I feel a need for a shower after visiting here.

[Helene West]

Posted by Midnight (here)
So sad.
Yet another of my formerly favourite sites has turned into a Trump groupie site.
I feel a need for a shower after visiting here.

with 9/10 of media as a one hive mind trump bashing site, it's still not enough for you. you guys want complete mind control monopoly over others. incredible
enjoy your santimonious shower

¤=[Post Update]=¤

@bayareamom - as someone who just didn't want to watch the entire hearings I appreciate your very unbiased take. admirable

[PurpleLama]

Graham's most salient point, good people will not be willing to step into such offices with such partisan tactics on display, paraphrased.

“And if you really wanted to know the truth, you sure as hell wouldn’t have done what you’ve done to this guy. … Boy, y’all want power. God, I hope you never get it.”

R-SC Graham (whom I usually hate, or, out Spartacus the Spartacus)

[scotslad]

Apparently Christine was "100% convinced" - does that imply doubt....curious.

[PurpleLama]

Posted by scotslad (here)
Apparently Christine was "100% convinced" - does that imply doubt....curious.

Convinced of what, exactly?

[NeedleThreader]

This site has gone completely Trump nuts. Q crazies. Unbelievable. Very sad indeed. I have been following this site since 2011.

When you all wake from your misogynistic hangover, I will remember you.

Bill, this has been a long time coming, but this has become an unmoderated nightmare. Good Luck everyone!

[Foxie Loxie]

"Actors act!" Having been married to a conman, I have seen how a good "actor" can win over an audience...even turning on the tears!

I purposely did not watch the "show"....what a travesty of "justice"!!

I would like to state here that I am not a "Trump Groupie". What I wish for is a Restoration of Rule of Law & an end to the Double Standard that has been in play for so long.

[ramus]

@ Midnight & NeedleThreader .... So because people don't agree with your beliefs you throw them in the trash,"my formerly favorite site" ... a shower won't wash that off... Politics, not worth fighting over.... And why is it ,that it turns into a personal attack ... "we are all Trump groupies","misogynistic" only a few people on this forum have voiced an opinion..... What is that?

[Helene West]

My mom is in her '80s and lives in an older community. She goes to church with two other older ladies every sunday for the past 3 years or so. She says they rarely talk politics and that's the way she prefers it. But this past sunday in their car ride en route one of the ladies mentioned what a circus the news has become in reference to the judge. My mom merely said, 'we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty'. Then the oldest of the bunch, 87, raised her voice and said to my Mom, "oh, so you're a trump lover, huh". It wasn't even about trump. My Mom was so taken aback and told me she felt uncomfortable the entire time in church!

You don't even have to say anything positive about this administration, if they just sense you are not a trump hater, woe to you!

[enigma3]

The back story to this is quite interesting.
1. A parent of Kavanaugh's (a judge) ruled against a parent of Ford's in a court hearing many moons ago.
2. An internet blogger stated that Christine Ford is currently (amongst other things) an undergrad CIA recruiter at Stanford.
3. That which was scrubbed from Ford's yearbooks indicates that she and her cohorts were hard partiers in high school and got very drunk on occasion.
4. Both Ford's parents are/were CIA assets.
5. The goodie #1. The CIA under Gina Haspel noted a big upsurge in traffic between two of its secret bases. Supposedly she/CIA captured all the chatter and determined that a rogue element within the CIA (still haven't cleaned it out yet) is behind the Kavanaugh attacks. She then confided this information to Trump and Grassley. Shortly thereafter Grassley called for a vote to send the nomination to the full Senate.
6. Goodie #2. Q has stated that the Dems tried to bargain the Kavanaugh seat by trading a yes on Kavanaugh for not releasing the unredacted FISA pages. That was summarily rejected by Trump et all.

One of the major problems I have with this is that the Dems have had some of this information and sat on it for at least 3 months. That doesn't exactly smell like above board ethics. It just plain smells.

As has been stated elsewhere, the accusers have brought NO corroboration for any of these charges. In fact, the 4 people Ford brought up have all issued statements that the events as described by Ford did not happen. Ford did state that one person witnessed the party. She is a close friend, so rather biased.

Finally, the woman prosecutor who questioned Ford later told the 51 Republicans in the Senate that she would never bring the case to trial for - wait for the boom - lack of evidence. Not even enough evidence to ask for a search warrant!

So there's that.

[Bayareamom]

To clarify: I did not vote in this last election. I am not a Trump groupie (nor anyone else's for that matter). If this were played out in a court of law -- well, forget that. Ford's allegation would not have seen the light of day inside a courtroom because she has (rather unfortunately) no facts to back up her assertions. I can't change that. It is what it is. Further, if she truly wants justice for herself, she can still legally pursue her claims against Judge Kavanaugh via appropriate channels. That's still an option for her as the statute of limitations in the county/state she's alleging this incident occurred still affords her the opportunity to pursue an investigation. .

Also, and just to be clear: I, too, am the victim of sexual assault. This happened years ago when I was living in Houston, Texas. This was during the early 1980's. I was clearly singled out by this man (I was sunbathing along w/many others at an apartment complex at the time); he approached me, struck up a conversation with me and asked me out on a date. Against my better instincts, I went out with this man. Later, he assaulted me in my apartment. I did confront him on the phone, afterwards. His reaction to my tears was one of complete disdain for me and what he'd put me through.

So after sharing this bit of very personal information, I can only say that, should I have been in Ford's shoes, only w/my own situation detailed above, I would NOT be able to PROVE what happened to me. I do not (in my own case) remember this man's name; in short, I have no other witnesses who can substantiate my claims against this man. I don't recall whether I told anyone about this incident or not, because I realized at the time that I had some small part w/all of this.

I should have listened to my better instincts. Something inside me told me not to have anything to do with this man, but I chose not to listen. HUGE mistake. There was a reason my instincts were clearly telling me not to have anything to do with this man at the time he approached me, but again, I chose not to listen.

SO - I am not at all saying that Ford was not telling the truth. Not at all. What I am saying is that she has absolutely no verifiable information within which to PROVE her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. In this country, it is the ACCUSER who needs to prove his/her allegation(s) against the accused.

Unfortunately, in Ford's case, her claims do not reach this threshold. Ford is clearly seen as a sympathetic individual in this scenario. I, too, wept for her at times, as I watched and listened to her testimony. But you cannot accuse and judge someone based on EMOTIONS alone. What I do find so vile in this particular case is the fact that Ford has never had her claims investigated by legal/police authorities. She is making her claim against this man without having one single shred of evidence to support her allegation.

She could be telling the truth! But again, her inability to provide ANY substantiated evidence against this man is, to my view, unconscionable. IF she is mistaken (and she could very well be) that it was this man who tried to rape her, put yourself in Kavanaugh's shoes. She has destroyed his reputation, forever. She has destroyed his family and put them through absolute hell.

On the other hand, she could be telling the truth. Judge Kavanaugh clearly enjoys his 'beer' and openly states he still does to this day. I can somewhat see that he MAY be guilty of this horrific event, BUT SHE DIDN'T PROVE IT.

Further, there were 65 women who submitted a letter in support of Kavanaugh's character; this was submitted to the Judiciary Committee. As one talking point stated, there have been a plethora of women to come forward who have known Judge Kavanaugh for years - some since they were just 14 years old. They've kept in touch with one another and will attest to his integrity, decency and so forth, in either their personal and/or professional relationships.

In the end, this isn't just about politics, as disgusting as that part of this scenario is. This has been a very good lesson for all who viewed this hearing about simple decency to another human being; it's about truth, civility, and hopefully, will be a huge lesson for ALL concerned, as to the simple decency we should ALL be showing one another as human beings.

I do understand the emotions behind this entire scenario, i.e., the MeToo movement, etc. I think many need to take a step back, take a deep breath, and look at this without emotion, but as fact finders only, trying to find the TRUTH in this situation (without resorting to make calling, calling someone a Trump groupie, or what have you).

Yesterday was a very emotional day for me, for a number of reasons. But I learned A LOT when viewing this hearing yesterday. I hope others did as well.

[enigma3]

Democracy can get very messy. Usually this kind of politics is well hidden from us. I remember as a young person watching the Cook County legislative proceedings in the early 70's. Talk about madness.

If anyone would like to refresh the memory as to the messiness of democracy, read some of the history of the Andrew Jackson presidency as he successfully fought off those wanting a Rosthchild central bank. Now that's messy.

One final note. I agree with Kelleyanne Conway. In all probability Ford was sexually assaulted at a party long ago, but not by Kavanaugh.

[Olam]

I'm Canadian and so don't fully grasp the legal details of it all, so please enlighten me if I'm wrong...

This circus show to me speaks loudly on how the legal system is totally off the rails, even at the highest levels- the Supreme courts.
As far as I understand it, any judge, anywhere at anytime should be totally neutral politically speaking.
Yet, there is both sides fighting to have a mathimatical advantage on supreme justices voting, which tells me that in reality, and this is out in the open as everyone is fighting on it, that NO supreme court judge is politically neutral in any judgement rendered!

This circus exposes the complete sham that is the legal system, even at the highest levels!

Meanwhile, us the people keep thinking that we must have judges with high morals and everything else, while all this time, they will and they are politically biased...
If it was not the case, you would not have both sides fighting to get the numerical advantage on a supreme court ruling.
Just so messed up and corrupted on all sides if you ask me.