Discussion in 'GC Hall of Fame' started by ursidman, Sep 4, 2018.
The woman reportedly sent the letter in July.
He had something like 6 prior FBI investigations too where this or similar matters never came up. Seems very out of character for him too based on the way people who grew up with him and know him now describe him. Unless this woman wants to come forward with her story and maybe provide corroboration, then this will be much ado about nothing in terms of the confirmation. Could be true, but seems unlikely.
Which makes Feinstein sitting on it seem even worse.
If she thought it was a significant concern, she would have raised it when something actually could have been done about it. The reason she didn't is because it's blatantly obvious to everyone, including her, that "A Democratic House member has been told that he may have done something, I can't tell you what, to someone, I can't tell you who, 35 years ago. And that person does not wish to pursue the matter." was never going to actually go anywhere. Particularly not if, as has been reported, the entirety of the allegations were "he and a friend locked me in a room by myself at a high school party and I didn't like it."
So, with the knowledge that it won't have any substantive effect, Feinstein sat on it until the process was over so that Democrats could try to get the only juice out of it that there is to squeeze - howling "We can't vote yet, we don't know anything about the mystery matter that Senator Feinstein won't tell us about, so we have to let it be investigated!" Didn't really work out for them when the entirety of the FBI's response was "received and noted in the file." though.
As specified on the last page, it's quite a bit more serious than that.
Let's hope the smear campaign has the same effect on Kavanaugh that it did on Thomas and he too can spend 2 or 3 decades on the bench despising Congressional Democrats.
So, I guess what he did (or didn't do) IN HIGH SCHOOL, is far more important and relevant than anything he did on the bench.
Describing Thomas' "challenges" as a smear campaign is laughable. It's quite sad, actually. Glad we take sexual harassment more seriously today.
Bork wasn’t a nut so much as the Democrats wanted their pound of flesh from him after he was willing to be the hatch man for Nixion’s Saturday Night Massacre. There was no way they were ever going to confirm him, just like there was no way Harry Ried would have ever let Kenneth Starr be nomination to the SCOTUS to go through.
The charges are a she said versus a he said, he said. There were three people in the room that evening by the women’s account and the other two deny the charges. Additionally, the Democrats have had this letter for two months, that was plenty of time to investigate this allegation and collect supporting evidence to support her story, ie friends from that time who she told, confirmation from the healthcare professional she sought help from, etc. We’ve haven’t seen anything like that. If that doesn’t start coming out shortly, this will come off looking like a smear campaign as a last ditch effort to stop Kavanaugh’s appointment. Ronan Farrow is following up this story, so it’s not like the folks digging don’t know what they are doing.
I also find it interesting that an accusation of sexual impropriety is being thrown at a member of Ken Starr’s team who investigated Clinton for the same thing.
Yeah, and I am not sure anyone could be crazier than Douglas, who once argued in a dissent that trees should have standing to sue in court. Yet the world didn't come crashing down when he sat on the bench.
Bork was a nut. The Saturday Night Massacre was only icing on the cake for why he was unfit for SCOTUS. Even today's originalists distance themselves from Bork's beliefs.
My first thought was "high school?" I hate to think of the girls who would say "And I kept having to remove his hand!"
But this didn't sound like a hand where it shouldn't be, it sounded like attempted rape.
You roll your eyes at the idea of trees having standing, yet you believe corporations should have constitutional rights, IIRC.
It sounds like something that needs to be substantiated by evidence rather than accusations.
I am hoping for some clarification regarding your earlier comments. You claimed that Thomas was smeared. Are you arguing that Hill's allegations were baseless?
This is it. A serious incident involving a nominee for the SCOTUS if it happened the way the woman is claiming. But coming 35 years afterwards and after numerous FBI background checks seems to be weak sauce. Don't think he will or should be held up for this.
If it is indeed a politically motivated attack, the damage done to people attempting to bring real complaints forward against those in power could be immense.
Good point. The boy who cried wolf syndrome could be an issue going forward.
Could be a real charge with politically motivated timing. Who knows? Not a fan of this tactic at all. However if 15 women come forward with abuse stories it will seem pivotal.