[W:361] Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Cardinal said:

As written in the article, Ford explains that the therapist wrote it down wrong, but that misses the point, which is that Ford's claim wasn't invented from whole cloth at the last second just to bring Kavanaugh down. Looking at the totality of her claims first going back to 2002 in her conversations with her husband, then again with her therapist, all lend weight to the credibility of her claims.

Click to expand...

...not entirely. The therapists' notes clash with Jone's current narratives on key facts (for example, how many boys were involved), indicating that A) while Jones absolutely has not invented this story whole-cloth, B) her memory of that event is likely fairly hazy, and/or has changed over time. In court, when given the choice between contemporaneous written evidence or later, memory-based verbal testimony, they pretty much always choose the former, which has the benefit of having been recorded at the time, and not having been subject to change since.

Agreed. He won't like that, though, because it would lock him out of a "I was just a kid, whaddya want?" shift later, which is where my spidey senses tell me this is going.

Click to expand...

I've had a nasty gut feeling of the same, which would be deeply unfortunate. But my gut feeling isn't evidence :shrug:

Perhaps. These things have a way of cascading, and it's my belief that with the change in Mark Judge's narrative that casacade has already begun.

This (other not coming forward) is true, and it's something I tend to wait for as well. As you say, sexual predators never have one victim. But as I also already said, we're perilously close to the narrative turning into "he was just a kid; that was a long time ago," which would turn his blanket denial on its head. We'll see.

Click to expand...

Concur - if he switches from "That Never Happened" to "Hey, Look, I Was Just A Drunk Kid, And Who Cares It Was A Long Time Ago", then, he should step down.

What do you think if there is no cascade, and this is where we are stuck?

That said, it should be mentioned that of the 65 women who defended Kavanaugh, only two are on record choosing to stand behind him after the release of yesterday's article:

Andrew Restuccia and I called many of Kavanaugh's 65 female HS acquittances who signed a letter supporting him. After his accuser came out on Sunday, only TWO said they still stood by him. More than two dozen didn't respond, and two declined to comment.

Click to expand...

Sure. Another way to present that data would be "Of the 65 women who came forward to stand behind Kavanaugh, not a single one has changed her story, changed her mind, or changed her position". Taking absence of evidence as evidence is how you end up on the History Channel describing the impact of Aliens on the ancient Maya

In response to the idea that this will discourage future nominees, I only have a direct memory of this happening twice to SCOTUS considerations: Thomas and now Kavanaugh. It certainly didn't happen with Gorcuch.

Click to expand...

:shrug: the plausible reasoning for Feinstein was any number or combination of a series of items. Personally, I have an analytic bias in favor of self-interest, but I think discouraging future GOP nominations by taking a pound of flesh isn't implausible at all. I can think of many folks on the GOP side who would support such a measure in retaliation, considering it all part of providing Good Vetting.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Parrish said:

Sexual assault is not a "notion."


She will testify, he'll rebut, the committee will vote and then, most probably, the Senate will vote.

Click to expand...

~~~~~~
"Christine Blasey Ford said, "she does not remember some key details of the incident,” according to the Washington Post article. For example, Ms. Ford “said she does not remember how the gathering came together the night of the incident.” She also does not remember how she got home. Yet she claims to be absolutely certain that Kavanaugh, whom she presumably knew only as an acquaintance and said she had not spoken to since the night the incident allegedly occurred, was involved in the alleged incident."
"Her story becomes quite murky and begins to fall apart. Although Ms. Ford believes the alleged incident occurred during the summer of 1982, she “said she does not remember some key details of the incident,” according to the Washington Post article. For example, Ms. Ford “said she does not remember how the gathering came together the night of the incident.” She also does not remember how she got home. Yet she claims to be absolutely certain that Kavanaugh, whom she presumably knew only as an acquaintance and said she had not spoken to since the night the incident allegedly occurred, was involved in the alleged incident."

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271343/last-minute-character-assassination-judge-joseph-klein
In a letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Senator Feinstein, 65 women who said they knew Judge Kavanaugh in high school vouched for his character:

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

PeteEU said:

And people wonder why American women don't come forward when sexually assulted... read this thread and social media...

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk

Click to expand...

People do wonder why American women lob accusations over 30 years later to try men in the court of public opinion on the basis of no evidence rather than a court of law within a reasonable timeframe of when the alleged event occurred.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

cpwill said:

I think you may be misreading me. I am not saying that an accuser lacks credibility simply if they are on the other political side of the aisle of those they are accusing. I am saying that accusers from the same side of the aisle in this sort of a highly-politically-charged accusation should (all other things being equal) have greater credibility, and that if instead all we see is one side of the political aisle lining up to partake, then that can mitigate their initial credibility - again, all things being equal. Rapists do not (as near as I can tell) issue a political litmus test prior to abusing others, and so finding uniformity in those who accuse would - again all things being equal - make the claim of a smear more plausible. I am probably saying this badly.

Click to expand...

If an accuser from the same side of the political aisle has greater credibility, then, if I'm doing my math correctly, an accuser from the opposite side of the political aisle has lesser credibility. There's really no other way to read that.

I don't think it's useless, I think it is - on net, and barely - more likely to be damming as to his early character.

Click to expand...

I mean that as a refutation of the incident it's useless. Saying the equivalent of "I don't recall" is worthless compared to "that didn't happen."

..... no. You are making leaps here which are not demonstrated - namely, that because one person got drunk, and another person said they were drunk at a particular time, then that individual must be guilty of the accusation and cannot remember because they were drunk. That's plausible, certainly, but it's not "something we accept to be true", it's a plausible interpretation of the competing claims of Jones and Judge.

I used to get drunk a lot when I was on temporary duty (TDY - you get sent somewhere for a short time to do one thing or another). I was dealing with stress, and dealing with it badly (pro tip: Alcohol is a depressant. Woops). That does not mean that if

A) Susie says I raped and beat her and
B) I don't remember ever doing such a thing that
C) Susie must be correct and I just can't remember because I've been drunk before in my life.

"Having been drunk" is not the same as "Anyone can accuse you of bad behavior and you cannot be but guilty, so long as the accusation is plausible."

Click to expand...

What I mean is that the points line up plausibly.

1. Ford says when she arrived at the party Kavanaugh and Judge were already heavily intoxicated.
2. Kavanugh and Judge were known booze hounds.
3. Judge has "no recollection of the incident."

None of these points contradict the other. In fact, they support each other. As it stands, Kavanaugh's blanket denial is the only thing standing in contradiction to Ford's claim, but thus far he has yet to offer a version of events using claims we can analyze.

I think it's also worth noting that while she claims to have been in fear of being raped, all she really describes physically is groping - which is a lower-order sexual assault, though still sexual assault. The leap from physical-action to yes-but-he-might-have-wanted-to-X is also an accusation not supported by her testimony. Even in her current version of the story, he doesn't seem to have been terribly intent on it. That is not to push this into the "LOL, Boys Will Be Boys" crap; it is to point out, again, that we can't take as evidence those things which we are inferring.

Click to expand...

That is not an accurate read of the article:

While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Click to expand...

She claims he put his hand over her mouth to prevent her from screaming, all the while trying to remove her clothing. That's a hefty magnitude greater than physically groping.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Napoleon said:

People do wonder why American women lob accusations over 30 years later to try men in the court of public opinion on the basis of no evidence rather than a court of law within a reasonable timeframe of when the alleged event occurred.

Click to expand...

Because you wouldn't understand unless you have lived it. The longer you hold such a secret, the more guilty you feel about not telling anyone and wondering if you should have said something or justifying why you didn't say something at that time, but then you don't want to say anything because of that guilt. At the same time, you feel there are times you should say something. You think about who might or might not believe you and how they will treat you if you tell, whether it has been an hour or 30 years. There are probably a dozen or more reasons (in a person's mind) not to have said something when it happened, depending on many factors. Heck, alcohol being involved at a teen party is in fact a very good reason for not saying something at that age to begin with because it could mean others getting in trouble for simply underage drinking (or at least that is what a teenager might think). Now you are the person who also told on the party, not just the person who tried to assault you. Whether adults realize it or not, that is a factor that teens consider.

Being away from the person, not having to see them or interact with them actually helps to keep such a secret, helps justify keeping it to some people. And it isn't just women and it isn't just Americans.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Napoleon said:

People do wonder why American women lob accusations over 30 years later to try men in the court of public opinion on the basis of no evidence rather than a court of law within a reasonable timeframe of when the alleged event occurred.

Click to expand...

That is pretty much universal.... she was young back then and afraid like most women. Now she is an accomplished strong woman and she sees her assaulter going for a life time appointment to a court that would most likely take away her rights... no brainier. Is this a "political" attack to stop him getting the job.. you betcha he is unqualified as hell and is being slammed through by the GOP. Along with the GOPs actions under Obama... the gloves are and should be off. The very fact that so much of his history is a national secret bothers the hell out of me.. His own lies and avoidance only adds to the problem and then on top of that there is this. This man should not be on any bench period.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

I don't think drunk high-schoolers thirty-five years ago should be held to the same standards prescribed by the #metoo movement today.

I'm also suspicious of the timing, first of the accuser, who denounced the alleged assault shortly after it became known Kavanaugh was on Trump's 'shortlist'; second of Feinstein's disclosure only after the Senate confirmation hearings were done and her never mentioning this during the extensive background checking and document review, in any interviews with Kavanaugh or in the actual hearing.

I've also read the accuser recounted the incident during "couples therapy" under a technique known as "recovered memory" which is known to be rather unreliable and induces the subject to believe the recovered memory actually happened. Minor discrepancies between the therapist's contemporaneous notes (this was in 2012) and the accuser's most recent accounts also need to be reconciled.

The fact this accuser (and her attorney) also have significant Democratic ties and the lawyer specializes in "MeToo claims", are also of concern.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Plus Ultra said:

I don't think drunk high-schoolers thirty-five years ago should be held to the same standards prescribed by the #metoo movement today.

Click to expand...

You may have a point there and perhaps drunk high school boys have an explanation for their behavior. I would love to hear it. Do you think we will hear it?

Based on the denial Kavanaugh has made, it seems that no admission is coming forth and thus there is nothing to explain in his opinion.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

roguenuke said:

I can recall quite clearly

Click to expand...

Clearly and accurately are two different things. There’s plenty of situations over the years that I’ve remembered clearly, yet when they come up with other people who were there, their own clear recollections are different in various ways than mine. The same has happened with clear memories of friends that don’t mesh with other friends or my own exactly.

The “clarity” part is irrelevant. Our brains want to believe we remember things accurately and will present the events in a clear and sure fashion; but that doesn’t mean that those decades old recollections are exactly right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Plus Ultra said:

I don't think drunk high-schoolers thirty-five years ago should be held to the same standards prescribed by the #metoo movement today.

Click to expand...

That is certainly a reasonable point to make, but Kavanaugh has made a complete denial, so it is no longer moot.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Plus Ultra said:

I don't think drunk high-schoolers thirty-five years ago should be held to the same standards prescribed by the #metoo movement today.

Click to expand...

Maybe not, but if you lie to the FBI as Kavanaugh would have done if true, than sorry that is lying under oath.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Plus Ultra said:

I don't think drunk high-schoolers thirty-five years ago should be held to the same standards prescribed by the #metoo movement today.

I'm also suspicious of the timing, first of the accuser, who denounced the alleged assault shortly after it became known Kavanaugh was on Trump's 'shortlist'; second of Feinstein's disclosure only after the Senate confirmation hearings were done and her never mentioning this during the extensive background checking and document review, in any interviews with Kavanaugh or in the actual hearing.

I've also read the accuser recounted the incident during "couples therapy" under a technique known as "recovered memory" which is known to be rather unreliable and induces the subject to believe the recovered memory actually happened. Minor discrepancies between the therapist's contemporaneous notes (this was in 2012) and the accuser's most recent accounts also need to be reconciled.

The fact this accuser (and her attorney) also have significant Democratic ties and the lawyer specializes in "MeToo claims", are also of concern.

Click to expand...

It was a long time ago...Of course any crazy accusation against Bill Clinton has NO time limit, but against one of their own?.......Lets just sweep it under the rug....Sure

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

haymarket said:

You may have a point there and perhaps drunk high school boys have an explanation for their behavior. I would love to hear it. Do you think we will hear it?

Click to expand...

Now that he's made a complete denial does it matter? If he lied to congress and the American people, surely his nomination is finished.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Judge Kavanaugh could have nipped this in the bud. “ Yes, I was at a party with Ms. Ford when I was a junior/senior in high school. We met at a party and my recollection differs from Ms. Ford’s. If I was inappropriate, I apologize and ask her forgiveness!”

Maybe this inability to deal with unforeseen circumstances, speaks more to the judge’s qualifications to sit on the highest court for the rest of his life.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

JustHanging said:

Now that he's made a complete denial does it matter? If he lied to congress and the American people, surely his nomination is finished.

Click to expand...

I think you are correct.

The only thing I can see happening is that Kavanaugh withdraws his nomination at the urging of Trump who then quickly nominates somebody new and the Senate confirms him over the next two months. That would be lightning quick speed and open them up to charges of rushing judgment but Trump only cares about a victory and if he has to sacrifice Kavanaugh to get it - he will happily throw him under the bus.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

The women seems very credible...Lets her speak......Funny to see trump outraged...Kavanaugh's vote needs to be put on hold.....America doesn't want a rapist in the Supreme Court

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Rexedgar said:

Judge Kavanaugh could have nipped this in the bud. “ Yes, I was at a party with Ms. Ford when I was a junior/senior in high school. We met at a party and my recollection differs from Ms. Ford’s. If I was inappropriate, I apologize and ask her forgiveness!”

Maybe this inability to deal with unforeseen circumstances, speaks more to the judge’s qualifications to sit on the highest court for the rest of his life.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. But that opportunity is now long gone because it means a complete 180 reversal from his complete denials.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

haymarket said:

I think you are correct.

The only thing I can see happening is that Kavanaugh withdraws his nomination at the urging of Trump who then quickly nominates somebody new and the Senate confirms him over the next two months. That would be lightning quick speed and open them up to charges of rushing judgment but Trump only cares about a victory and if he has to sacrifice Kavanaugh to get it - he will happily throw him under the bus.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that ship has sailed. Maybe this reaction is why Kavanaugh’s qualifications should be re-examined....

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

AlphaOmega said:

good god, can the left at lrast try to come up with a different attack plan? The last time the left tried this they got stuart smalley ejected from their own party. Too funny. Ask them to dig into Bill Clintons past and its all out defense. What seething hypocrites.

Click to expand...

After McConnell's chicken **** move last year, the GOP has ZERO room to complain.<-PERIOD! You guys can dish it out but you can't take it.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

StuPedaso said:

After McConnell's chicken **** move last year, the GOP has ZERO room to complain.<-PERIOD! You guys can dish it out but you can't take it.

Click to expand...

Much of the GOP is Outraged over these accusations!...This was a long time ago...Still if it was Bill Clinton, then that would be different.....The woman would appear on Fox News nightly...and her story would be believed without question

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Rexedgar said:

Yeah, that ship has sailed. Maybe this reaction is why Kavanaugh’s qualifications should be re-examined....

Click to expand...

If Trump and Kavanaugh stand firm insisting on his innocence, the FBI must be dispatched to launch a thorough investigation into this charge. That will require time and patience.

In the meantime, the re-examination of Kavanaugh can begin.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Cardinal said:

If an accuser from the same side of the political aisle has greater credibility, then, if I'm doing my math correctly, an accuser from the opposite side of the political aisle has lesser credibility. There's really no other way to read that.

Click to expand...

Hm. I think you are treating this as more directly competitive, while I am treating it as an adjustment of credibility scores

The way this looks in my head is:

No other information Available, He-Said-She-Said. Credibility of each witness is 0.5 on a 0.0 to 1.0 scale.

She is making a claim against personal interest. Her credibility to rises somewhere between 0.5 and [a number higher than 0.5 but less than 1.0] depending on the salience of the interest she is making a claim against.

She is not making a claim against personal interest. Her credibility remains at 0.5.

What I think you are inferring (and I am not saying it is or isnt' true, I remain on-the-fence on it) is:

"She is making a claim strongly in her personal interest. Credibility reduced to somewhere between 0.5 and [a number lower than 0.5] depending on the saliency of the interest being favored." In this case, I think we would need either a history or a very strong interest before we began to push the needle.

For example, a woman who comes forward with a sexual harrassment claim only after a settlement awards $10 million to any woman so harrassed by [insert predator here] has a claim which we reasonably look at with a bit more of a jaundiced eye than the women who came out preceding that settlement. That isn't saying that she is or is not telling the truth, it is only saying that she reasonably is going to need to provide significant supporting evidence in order to receive the awared, because she has a strong incentive to now claim that she, too, deserves $10 million.


In this instance, the evidence is not strong. We have one account, by a woman whose memory seems fairly hazy (she cannot remember the time, or the place, or the circumstances), and whose memory appears to have changed over time (specifically, she appears to have given different accounts about who, and exactly how many boys, were involved). If we state that it is plausible -and it is- that the memory of the boys is impacted by consumption of alcohol, then we also have to take into account that the woman herself was drinking, which can also impact memory (and may have, which may, along with time, be the reason for the haziness, the discordant details, etc). The accused flatly denies and there is, as near as I am aware, no other evidence saying this occurred, or that he is the kind of individual to have done this.

If more evidence appears (for example, in the form of more women coming forward), I think that math begins to shift. But right now, the evidence does not meet the standards that we used to say that Trump and Moore were likely guilty of what they were accused of.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Roadvirus said:

Bull****.

After the circus caused by the Democrats during the hearings, the court of public opinion will support Kavanaugh.
They'll see this for what it is: A pre-planned smear.

This will blow up in the Democrats' face. It'll blow up in their face and the mess will be stuck to their faces all the way to election day in November.

Click to expand...

I think it will go like this in the end.
The public knows what the resisters in congress are all about.

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

haymarket said:

If Trump and Kavanaugh stand firm insisting on his innocence, the FBI must be dispatched to launch a thorough investigation into this charge. That will require time and patience.

In the meantime, the re-examination of Kavanaugh can begin.

Click to expand...

Re: Woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct comes forward

Cardinal said:

I mean that as a refutation of the incident it's useless. Saying the equivalent of "I don't recall" is worthless compared to "that didn't happen."

Click to expand...

:shrug: I disagree. It is "worth less", but not worthless.

What I mean is that the points line up plausibly.

1. Ford says when she arrived at the party Kavanaugh and Judge were already heavily intoxicated.
2. Kavanugh and Judge were known booze hounds.
3. Judge has "no recollection of the incident."

Click to expand...

Sure, the story is plausible. That doesn't mean that it becomes evidence or "that which we know to be true". It is, instead, a plausible inference.

None of these points contradict the other. In fact, they support each other. As it stands, Kavanaugh's blanket denial is the only thing standing in contradiction to Ford's claim

Click to expand...

Other than Ford's earlier claims, as represented in the notes, which partially contradict her current claims. A plausible explanation for this discrepancy is hazy memory, v lying, but that is an inference. It also rationally degrades the credibility of the accusation, just as the judge changing his story would - as we have agreed - degrade the credibility of his denial.

but thus far he has yet to offer a version of events using claims we can analyze.

Click to expand...

Describe the negative? Prove a negative? ..... Meh, I'm pretty hesitant to demand that, as it is nigh impossible to provide.

That's one of the problems with the "this thing happened, but I can't remember exactly when or where" accusation. It denies the accused the ability to provide counter evidence that he wasn't there or wasn't around or wasn't part of X by creating an unfalsifiable claim.


Anyay, it is an exact reading of her claims about his actions. She does not describe rape. She does not describe attempted rape. She describes groping, including an attempt to silence complaint. That is sexual assault, and it is criminal, and it damn well should be considered sexual assault and it damn well should be criminal. But her claim that he was attempting rape is entirely her inference (based on memory that she admits is imperfect, imprecise, and impacted by her emotions and alcohol), rather than an action she witnessed. Again we are at the difference between inference and evidence. The two are not the same.



It is also worth noting that, while we are waiting for more evidence to come out against the Judge (for example, more accusers come forward, or if he changes his story to some variation of "Cmon-Maybe-It-Happened-But-If-So-It-Was-Boys-Being-Boys"), it is also possible for evidence to come out against Jones. She claims (IIRC) that she wanted to remain anonymous, only deciding after Feinstein publicized the existence of the letter to come forward... but took a lie detector test in August. You take a lie detector test (generally) to strengthen your case against accusations that you are lying... but who was she attempting to strengthen that case against in August, when she wanted no one to know of it? If it later comes out that it was part of preparation for this kind of reveal, or that she in fact intended to go public at the time (and lied when she claimed at that point she did not), then that, too, would count as evidence against her accusations, just as changing his story later would count as evidence against Kavanaugh's denial.



We'll see what the next few days hold. I'll admit, I'm going to put a lot of weight on whether or not more victims come out of the woodwork. As you and I both agree: predators don't stop with just one, when they get away with it. They tend to accumulate years worth of abuse stories.