Custom Search

Thursday, September 27, 2018

CHRISTINE FORD vs KAVANAUGH - 36 YRS AGO WHO REMEMBERS ALL DETAILS ACCURATELY?











CHRISTINE FORD vs BRETT KAVANAUGH - 36 YRS AGO WHO REMEMBERS ALL DETAILS ACCURATELY?

DIDN’T THIS INCIDENT OCCURR IN HIGH SCHOOL?

I’M NOT MOCKING CHRISTINE FORD NOR AM I TRYING TO SOUND HYPOCRITICAL BUT WHY IS IT ALWAYS LIKE THIS FOR GOP SCOTUS COURT NOMINEES? WHY??

I WAS TRYING TO REMAIN SILENT BUT I HAD TO SPEAK UP.

THIS DRAMA IS NOT ABOUT PROTECTING WOMEN, IT’S STRAIGHT POLITICAL THEATER.


Post Sources: BBC News, Fox News, NBC News, Washington Post, Youtube


***** Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh hearing: Key takeaways so far


With a seat on the Supreme Court hanging in the balance, Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh are appearing in front of senators to state their case and share their stories. Here are some of the key takeaways so far.

Everyone knew what Christine Blasey Ford was going to say before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday morning. Her formal opening statement was released to the public on Wednesday evening.

Reading what she was going to say and hearing her speak it, in a quiet, sometimes faltering voice, are two very different things, however.

The committee hearing began with statements by Republican chairman Chuck Grassley and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein, and the exchanging accusations of political obfuscation and procedural misconduct threatened to cover the proceedings in a political fog.

For a taut 20 minutes, however, Ms Ford cut through the fog with searing emotion. She spoke of traumatic memories and decades of shame; of a civic duty to come forward and recent months of hounding media and death threats.

The images of her speaking - the first glimpse the public at large has had of her besides a few grainy photos - will linger well beyond Thursday's hearing or even Brett Kavanaugh's ultimate professional fate.


Once Ms Ford concluded, the fog descended again. Thanks in large part to a disjointed format that featured five-minute segments alternating between veteran sex-crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, a surrogate questioner for the Republicans, and Democratic senators, there was little flow to proceedings.

It was as if viewers were flipping back and forth between a CourtTV criminal cross-examination and a public-access television congressional hearing.

Democrats succeeded in gleaning a few memorable moments from Ms Ford. She said she was 100% certain that Brett - referring to Mr Kavanaugh repeatedly by his first name - was the teenager who assaulted her.

She also, in reply to a question by Vermont Democrat Pat Leahy, recounted how the enduring recollection she has from the incident was Mr Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, laughing as they stumbled down the stairs after the alleged attack.


Ms Mitchell, in her interrogation, pulled at a number of threads in Ms Ford's story.

Who drove her to and from the house on the night of the party?

Why did she tell Senate investigators that she couldn't meet them in Washington because she was afraid of flying if she frequently travelled by air for pleasure?

Did she or did she not share her 2012 therapist records with a reporter from the Washington Post?

That final line of questioning is key, since it's those records that help corroborate that Ms Ford had spoken about the assault well before Mr Kavanaugh became a candidate for the Supreme Court.

The other questions seemed more geared toward undermining Ms Ford's credibility - the kind of strategy useful during depositions or trials to undermine a jury's trust in a witness or, perhaps, force them to crack under the accumulated pressure of the interrogation.

Every five minutes, however, Democrats threw Ms Ford a lifeline.


In the end, however, Ms Mitchell herself seemed slightly exasperated by the format she was working under. When it comes to trying to arrive at the accurate recollection of trauma, she said, "there's no study that shows that this setting, in five-minute increments, is the best way to do that.

As the first half of the hearing drew to a close, the senators began to argue about entering various outside statements into the record, only to be interrupted by one of Ms Ford's lawyers.

"Can we be excused?" he asked.

With the partisan fog thick again, it's a sentiment many Americans may have shared.

No comments: