* If Kavanaugh had been arrested, tried, and convicted of this made up incident, the court records would have been sealed and expunged because he would have been a juvenile. The expungement would give you a legal right to deny it ever happened.
Government background investigations do not go in to criminal activity before age 18 for this reason.
They never should have given this crazy lady the time of day.
* Steve Sailer: It’s pretty hard to be in any kind of illegal business above dealing marijuana to your friends without being connected one way or another to violence.
A friend of mine in high school was the son of a top bookie, who was occasionally off to the Men’s Correctional Colony for awhile. His dad was a high IQ guy. But how do you collect on debts in illegal businesses if the government won’t send the sheriff around on your behalf?
* Lib websites are playing up the white man angle but none are considering that lowering the burden of proof for sexual assault will put more African American men of color behind bars.
* From the perspective of living with (and sometimes arguing with) Mrs. ic1000 (a wonderful mom and stepmom, if I haven’t mentioned that) — seems that the Democrats’ Kavanaugh strategy is effective at mobilizing their base, and also at bringing straying liberal-but-practical Nice White Ladies back into the fold.
Most commenters here are concerned about the logic and plausibility of the competing narratives, the weight of evidence, precedent, consistency (e.g. Keith Ellison), and the like.
The news isn’t a priority for Mrs. ic1000, she gets it from the TV, Facebook, and talking with friends. She relates stories to her own lived experience. As a pretty woman of a certain age, that includes a number of decades-old episodes of groping and harassment at work, and the advice from (female) supervisors to “let it go”.
On the one hand, Kavanaugh the hard-drinking, entitled ‘bro’. On the other, an accomplished woman with no reason to lie or exaggerate. So where there’s smoke , there’s likely fire.
Sen. Feinstein’s camp threw a Hail Mary pass, and why not? The upsides are plain. The story might be truthful or truthy enough to sink the nomination. Or, “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime,” somebody else might step forward with some other, more credible tale. At a minimum, a prominent conservative’s reputation has been impugned. If he should turn liberal on the Court, there’s plenty of opportunity for rehabilitation.
The Republican Brain Trust’s idea to blame some other, drunkier bro just reminds this demographic of “It Wasn’t Me”. Maybe not such a brainstorm after all.
* “Rolling Stone’s lawyer says he’d be happy to stipulate Phi Psi. But Eramo attorney Libby Locke suddenly stands and demands that the jurors trust their own ears.
“It goes to credibility,” says Locke.
Judge Glen Conrad agrees.”
See this is the difference between a real trial and the kangaroo court of public opinion as filtered thru the leftist media. In a real trial you have opposing counsel viewing the witness with appropriate skepticism (whether she is a man or a woman – none of this bullshit where people are entitled to a presumption that they are telling the truth based on chromosomes) and an unbiased judge as a reality check. Without this check, people get carried away on a wave of wishful thinking that supports their pre-existing biases. Jackie’s account on the tape is filled with inconsistencies – she can’t even get the name of the frat right. But they go right over Erdely’s head because she WANTS to believe and there is no one telling her to be skeptical (the old journalistic maxim that if your mother tells you that she loves you, you should check it first before you print it is forgotten in the Woke Era). Some stories are too good to check.
In a courtroom, people lie more often than not. I once had an old lawyer tell me that in a courtroom, every time a witness tells the complete unvarnished truth, the brass eagle on top of the flagpole comes to life and flies around the courtroom, but that in all his years of practice he had never seen it. Therefore, judges instruct the jury that they not only may but MUST assess the credibility of each witness and that they are free to discount the witness’s testimony if they find her to be not credible.
Meanwhile, in leftist media land, the great tradition of show trials continues. In a show trial, an accusation is the same thing as a conviction – if you weren’t guilty then you wouldn’t be accused in the first place.
This shows real short term thinking by the Dems, like their announcement of the Biden Rule and their decision to do away with the filibuster for judicial nominations. The politics of personal destruction are a double edged sword. RBG, an old school liberal, says that the “old way” was better for everyone.
The next time the tables are turned, the teenage sex life of Democrat nominees will be up for grabs (no pun intended) as well. And if Kav makes it onto the Court, I would wager that he is going to be more of a Thomas than a Souter. If he ever thought that he could gain “strange new respect” from the Washington establishment by shifting his views to the left a little, he must now know that is a hopeless cause for himself for the rest of his (I hope) many decades on the Court. In fact he will burn with hatred for the leftists who tried to destroy his life just to score some political points. Maybe as far as Schumer is concerned, this is nothing personal, just business, like a Mafia hit, but Kav is sure to take this personally.
* If Diablo Valley College professor Eric Clanton was willing to slam a bicycle lock into the heads of Trump supporters, potentially causing fatal injuries, then I don’t see why a Palo Alto College professor Christine Ford wouldn’t embellish hazy high school booze party groping to knock off a conservative Supreme Court nominee. It obvious that the Northern California Resistance will lie, cheat, steal, and kill to win a political argument. Their stupid academic titles should not be given a fig of weight in evaluating their statements. They can pretty much be dismissed out of hand as Machiavellian liars.
* Most cops are remarkably blase about whom they send to prison for a crime – the important thing is the clearance rate. Some other guy actually confessed to the murder that they pinned on Dixon but since they already had Dixon down they told the other guy to get lost.
I think one of the reasons that they are so blase (aside from not really giving a damn about anything other than collecting their pensions ASAP) is that they know that most of the folks that they deal with are amply guilty of other crimes for which they have not been convicted – either they have gotten clean away or there is insufficient proof to convict. For every crime they are tried for, they have probably committed 10 other crimes that they have gotten away with (maybe less serious ones than murder). There are some rare cases where a choir boy is wrongly accused but usually those who are convicted are immersed in the criminal milieu and have done all sorts of things before.
* Can we look forward to a Playboy feature on The Girls of Kavanaugh?
