Chuck Grassley has released a letter signed by 65 women who say they knew Kavanaugh back then and he was a nice guy. Never mind that this is like saying ‘the girls he didn’t try to rape like him!’, how the hell did anyone find 65 women who were friends with Kavanaugh 40 years ago in 24 or 48hours and then get them to sign a letter? Of course they had the letter all along, which means they knew about the allegation all along.
Well come on now, who doesn’t have a ready-to-go list of 65 women that say you’re a good guy, just in case some crazy from your past says you raped her? I assume that’s standard issue for anyone of note in the Republican party.
To be fair, some of them have binders full of women.
It’s not like Fred Guttenberg didn’t introduce himself before extending his hand.
Also in the article:
Kavanaugh also said that he used the term “abortion-inducing drugs” during his confirmation solely because he was mimicking the way the plaintiffs he was discussing had used it.
It’s interesting that, instead of the 65 women letter, Kavanaugh doesn’t offer the corroborating testimony of the friend. I suppose that to do so he’d have to admit that something happened, that he and his friend were in a room with the accuser. Of course if nothing happened, an actual witness who could say nothing happened would be far better than a letter from non-witnesses. So he’s clearly taking the position that there isn’t even a misunderstanding.
Also, too, that they had the letter ready implies that this story has been circulating for a long time, maybe even came out at the time it allegedly occurred. Why else would it have come up during the vetting, and why else would there be 65 women ready to make this character voucher decades later?
I don’t know how these things work, but I imagine that once you get on a serious potential list to be a nominee, there are teams of investigators and lawyers who start preparing for all these sort of things. Probably starting years ago. The idea that these hearings “discover” something new seems unlikely: it’s about what gets disclosed, what can be proven, and how the PR spin works out.
I think that’s right, but it means these allegations probably weren’t a secret limited to just the three people allegedly in the room. Someone told the investigators. If it was Kavanaugh who told them, he did it because he knew someone else would tell them, or at least about the rumor of a scandal. If not Kavanaugh, then someone else. This was a story associated with Kavanaugh back in the day.
Which is to say it isn’t new, something trumped up to damage his reputation now.
You could imagine that, but I doubt it usually happens, especially with this half-assed collection of dipshits in the administration and on the hill. None of them thought they’d be in this position two years ago.
Sure, but in this case I believe it’s the “deep state”, not the Trump people. K. was picked by the Federalists, who do have the people, the plan, the lawyers, the money, and the long term view to handle this sort of thing. DT and the current congressional leadership are just their rubber stampers at this point.
Also, I love the headlines that say Kavanaugh ‘vehemently denies’ the allegations. It’s like he strenuously objects.
“I deny it.”
“We don’t believe your denial.”
“In that case, I vehemently deny it!”
“Oh, vehemently, that’s different.”
It’s not the half-assed dipshits in the administration doing the vetting. It’s The Federalist Society, and they’ve had binders full of thoroughly-researched candidates for years now.
The Federalist Society is full of half-assed dipshits. It’s a membership requirement. We’re not talking about Hamilton, Madison, and Jay here.
I follow a bunch of conservatives on Twitter, in the interests of seeing their side of issues. This is from today, with reference to the Kavanaugh allegations:
He has already decided she’s not credible, specifically because he’s a conservative. He knows neither her name nor the full allegations. All he knows is, he’s a conservative and a woman is accusing another conservative of something, so she is clearly a liar.
I’ve rarely seen a better example of how irrelevant facts have become to today’s GOP.
He went to an all-boys school but he knows 64 girls from another school who all remember him?
I could probably pick 64 faces out of a yearbook lineup or something, out of strange rfaces, but 99% of them would be people I barely knew.
One of the women who signed the letter explains. Basically, going to an all girls or all boys school doesn’t keep your from talking to the opposite sex.
If it was incredible to believe that 65 people remember him from nearly 40 years ago well enough to vouch for him in the face of a sexual assault allegation, and that they did so independently, finding each other to do so within the space of a few hours, this short column doesn’t make it less incredible. Even assuming she’s telling the truth, she doesn’t even really deny that it was organized. All she says is that she found out about it from another woman, which says nothing about when or how it started.
Apparently Viriginia Hume - Britt Hume’s daughter and former RNC employee - also signed the letter. She also claims she only heard about it the night before it was released, without explaining how she heard about it and how it was organized. So that’s 2 Republican Party apparatchiks already. There will be more.
Well if they’ve had every female Republican Senator and member of Congress sign too, they’re halfway there!
Anyone can find 65 people they didn’t rape. I’m not sure why the letter is even relevant.
The real issue here is that the accuser evidently will not come forward. Obviously, that is her right. But in Feinstein’s position, I can understand that a single, anonymous accusation would not sway any votes in the senate.