In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


You’ve Got to Be Kidding Me

A Supreme Court nomination can now officially be held up by anyone who knew the person in the past.

A woman who admits to being so drunk she was “on the floor, foggy and slurring her words” at the time of the incident alleges that Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to her in college 35 years ago. The New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow and Jane Meyer, despite what I’m sure were their best efforts, could find no eyewitness to the supposed act, but did find two people who were there and the wife of a third who said it did not happen.

In fact, the woman making the allegation had to be convinced that she knew what she was talking about. From the New Yorker piece:

She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections . . .

Ramirez acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening, and that, if she ever presents her story to the F.B.I. or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, and questioned about her memory, given her drinking at the party.

And yet, after several days of considering the matter carefully, she said, “I’m confident about the pants coming up, and I’m confident about Brett being there.”

Note that she also did not specifically see Kavanaugh do this. She heard someone say he did it and says she saw his pants coming up.

The only “evidence” is an ANONYMOUS classmate who wasn’t present.

A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year.

I will tell you something. As a reporter, I would never quote someone anonymously making a charge like this that could ruin a person. This individual needs to be on the record so we know that he means what he says and so we can see what motivations he might have for coming forward.

Ramirez may think she is telling the truth, and she may even be telling the truth. It’s just that there is absolutely no evidence, and plenty of reason for doubt, that she is. Many, many reasonable doubts.

Plus, she has an obvious motive for making this up. I AM NOT SAYING SHE IS MAKING THIS UP. But there is a motive for doing so:

Ramirez is a registered Democrat, but said that her decision to speak out was not politically motivated and, regarding her views, that she “works toward human rights, social justice, and social change.”

Obviously, everything she “works” for would be in jeopardy if Kavanaugh were put on the Supreme Court.

All of this said, there probably should be a very expeditious FBI investigation of this and the charge by Christine Blasey Ford. Not that these flimsy charges merit an FBI probe. But I doubt Kavanaugh at this point can be confirmed without it. Susan Collins, and possibly others, will need that fig leaf.

Anita Hill’s charges took three days for the FBI to look at. Get the investigation done, run the hearing, and vote. Two weeks max.

8 thoughts on “You’ve Got to Be Kidding Me”

  1. If all of this BS happened in Panama the accusers would be in deep trouble. They have strict slander laws here. Even if I had a bad experience with a store I do not post anything negative on the Internet.

    Amen to your last paragraph.

  2. Apparently, the crusading Democrats are pretty much a one-trick pony. It’s also clear that none of them attended high school or college (entirely believable) or they would remember what it was like to be a teenager/young adult more than 30 years ago.

  3. While whacking nominee to the Supreme Court is a big deal, it’s not a surprise to those of us out here in fly over.
    For the first time anyone can remember, one who votes for or works for the wrong person can be fired, refused service in a public restaurant, be vilified in the press, lose the friendship of decades, be called vile names by prominent politicians, and be held up to ridicule by MSM talking heads.
    Obviously we don’t count for much in the public eye as a Supreme Court judge, but it’s still happening.

  4. And our local newspapers/television stations are leading with this as ‘explosive new claims’ and ’embattled nominee hit with new charges’ …. you name it.

    They’re itching for war. They should be careful what they wish for.

  5. “Anita Hill’s charges took three days for the FBI to look at. Get the investigation done, run the hearing, and vote. Two weeks max.”

    The rules have changed. Once an investigation is begun, Democrats can say, “Here’s another witness to interview!” Each new witness could give the names of two more. And Feinstein and the rest of Team Dirtbag would insist that each and every “lead” be investigated. One becomes 2 becomes 4 becomes 8, and so on. In ten days, there’d be 256 witnesses to interview…and the next day, 512. Enough is enough. Republicans should give no more ground.

  6. I agree with Robert– follow the money–she had been tutored by her lawyer for 6 days? Was Ms. Ford sitting there also?
    If it smells and looks like a skunk, it must be a skunk! Smells that way to me.

  7. “After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said …”

    Took that long to negotiate her price. Next question: who paid?

Comments are closed.