Guest Post by Kurt Schlichter
In the off-chance Christine Blasey Ford actually shows up and testifies – I give it under 50% – the wussy GOP senators on the Judiciary Committee are going to treat her with kid gloves, which is awful. No one making an accusation with such potentially catastrophic consequences for the accused (here, the accused may properly be called “the victim”) should escape harsh, penetrating cross-examination. This is particularly true when the Jenga tower that is her lunchmeat story is teetering on the edge of collapse.
But they will instruct their questioners to use kid gloves nonetheless, because they are terrified of being portrayed as big meanies for challenging her shaky story. Pathetic. As my new book Militant Normals: How Regular Americans Are Rebelling Against the Elite to Reclaim Our Democracy explains (and you must order it now because it comes out next Tuesday), this illustrates the disconnect between status-obsessed elites (including conservativish ones in the Senate) and Normal people who want to cut through the San Francisco sidewalk stuff.
Our GOP senators are more concerned with their reputations in the Beltway Bubble, while Normal people just want to get at the truth. And to get at it, their questioning would be very different than the kind of “We want to nurture and support you in this difficult time” garbage we’re likely to hear from people who should be shredding her flimsy fabric of lies.
Here are questions I’d ask if I were a senator doing the questioning, along with some anticipated colloquy with my distinguished colleagues.
1. Dr. Ford, you are a committed liberal, correct?
[“Senator Feinstein’s objection that my question undermines the witness’s credibility is noted and disregarded.”]
2. And it’s true that you wouldn’t want Future Justice Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court because of his conservative judicial philosophy regardless of the alleged incident?
3. Your lawyers are Democrat activists, right?
4. Are they working for free, or do you intend to pay them with the several hundred thousand dollars the various GoFundMe campaigns in your name have raised?
5. You traveled to Hawaii in your work and back east in August. So, when did that “fear of flying” we heard about start and stop?
[“Mr. Chairman, Senator Flake’s winking at the cameras of the liberal media outlets is distracting me. I know he needs a job, but let him suck up to MSNBC on his own time.”]
6. So, Dr. Ford, let’s get to the basics. Exactly what day and time did this incident happen?
7. Exactly where did this incident happen?
8. How many people were in the house at the time?
[“Mr. Chairman, I’ll pause my questioning to let Senator Hirono count the number on her fingers. While she’s trying to work it out, I’m hitting the head.”]
9. In 2012, your therapist wrote down that there were four people in the room. Why would she do that if you didn’t tell her that?
10. Do you find it odd that each person who you now say was present has stated that they have no idea what you are talking about?
11. If they might not remember because the party was nothing special, how often did you and your teen pals go to houses with a bunch of boys and get drunk?
12. You claim Future Justice Kavanaugh was drunk. How drunk were you?
13. As a psychologist, will you concede that alcohol inebriation will make a teenager’s memory unreliable?
[“Senator Sasse, your Fredocon whining about how we’re better than this and how this is not who we are is noted. I’ll ask my questions however I damn well please.”]
14. You claim you thought Future Justice Kavanaugh was trying to rape you. If so, why didn’t he chase you and actually rape you?
15. You say you left the house without telling anyone. Doesn’t that seem like something odd that your female friend would remember?
16. If you thought Future Justice Kavanaugh was going to rape you, why would you leave your friend alone there with this alleged monster?
17. And you didn’t call the cops, right?
18. You didn’t tell your parents?
19. You didn’t even tell your friends?
20. But you happened to tell your therapist in 2012, right around the time Future Justice Kavanaugh’s name was being brought up as a Supreme Court candidate?
[“Mr. Chairman, can you have the withered commie crone dressed as a handmaid dragged out so I can continue?]
21. Future Justice Kavanaugh was a big deal in 2012, and you say you mentioned his name, but it’s not in your therapist’s notes. It’s not even in there that your attacker is now a well-known judge. Your therapist sure got a lot wrong, didn’t she?
22. Say, at any time, did future Justice Kavanaugh suggest that you put some ice on that?
23. Did Future Justice Kavanaugh slap you around like a Democrat congressman from Minnesota?
24. Did Future Justice Kavanaugh drive hammered and leave you to drown in an Oldsmobile?
[“Mr. Chairman, let’s pause. Senator Sasse spilled the pearls he was clutching.”]
25. You say this event damaged you permanently, but you did not seek treatment before 2012 even though you are a psychologist, correct?
26. You wanted to remain anonymous, right?
[“Mr. Chairman, can you have the screeching B-movie actress dressed as a handmaid dragged out so I can continue?”]
27. You sent a letter to your congresswoman in July, right?
28. You hired a famous, leftist lawyer in D.C. in August, right?
29. You say you took a lie detector test in August, right?
30. But you contacted the Washington Post, but did you really think they would do anything about it before you gave them your name?
31. And you’re here voluntarily, not even under subpoena, right?
32. You never intended to remain anonymous, did you?
[“Mr. Chairman, can you have the beta male dressed as a handmaid dragged out so I can continue?”]
33. Are you aware that people are calling you “brave”?
34. Are you aware that people are calling you a “hero”?
35. And are you aware that Anita Hill has been celebrated as a brave liberal hero since the Justice Thomas hearings?
36. As a psychologist, you are aware that sometimes people say things that are not true to get attention, correct?
37. As a psychologist, you are aware that sometimes people enjoy the spotlight?
38. As a psychologist, isn’t it possible that someone might invent a claim of assault in order to get attention or achieve a political goal?
[“Mr. Chairman, I need to pause to let Senator Spartacus take a call from T-Bone.”]
39. As a psychologist, do you disagree with the consensus that sexual abusers repeat their crimes?
40. How do you account for the fact that not one single person, besides you, has claimed that Future Justice Kavanaugh has ever tackled someone and tried to rip off her clothes?
41. Sixty-five women signed a letter saying Future Justice Kavanaugh was always a perfect gentleman. Why would they all lie?
42. No one allegedly in the house for the alleged party corroborates your story. Why would they all lie?
43. For that matter, no one at the dorm corroborates that other leftist woman’s story either. Why would they all lie?
44. And, of course, no one corroborates Stripper Matlock’s story, right?
45. So, why are you lying?
This whole ridiculous charade illustrates the vital importance of cross-examination as the foundation of our justice system. Ford does not deserve special treatment. When the Democrats talk about “respect” and “victim blaming,” what they are seeking to do is put out-of-bound the kind of questions whose answers (or, more likely, non-answers and evasions) will demonstrate to the world what a crock her whole story is.
Normal people get that. Let’s see if our elite does.
For more on how our elite is a giant burning dumpster fire of mediocrity, presented in a much funnier manner than this mostly serious column, order my new book Militant Normals: How Regular Americans Are Rebelling Against the Elite to Reclaim Our Democracy now so you’ll get delivered on the release date, Tuesday, October 2nd!
Throughout this fiasco, we keep hearing from those who have fallen for the Kavenaugh lies, how we should “always believe a woman,” or we are condescendingly asked if we would believe our daughters if she said she was rapped. So I have responded to these people w/these 2 basic questions, and I cant get a direct answer out of *any* them. Maybe the folks here can help. Here it goes: if you had a very close & upstanding friend/family member fall under the same accusations as Kavenaugh (which you are so quick to accept), would you believe your kin or the accuser? And how do you know who’s telling the truth when no evidence exists?
No judge would even allow her testimony in Court without some serious corroboration…
I , along with every other native born American , was a teenager. Most, but not all of us, went to ‘clandestine’ parties where lots of beer was available. Things were done of which we are not proud. Some girls would get drunk and lose their virginity in the most undignified way, with a clumsy drunken boy atop them in some alien bedroom belonging to a friend of a friend’s parents. For others tragedy would strike. Off they would go into the night driving drunk with only a ‘In Memoriam’ page in their high school yearbook to mark their passing after they wrapped their car around a telephone pole at 80mph!
We were kids pretending we were adults. From what I gather Brett Kavanaugh was not one of the wild kids. He kept his GPA up enough to get into Yale as a male WASP with a pedigree at a time when that was very hard to do. Debra Ford, despite also attending a swank prep school, did not. She ended up at State U. On the basis of this early indicator of where one stood in the high school social heirarchy it is my conclusion that Debra Ford was the wild kid unlikely to have been ‘traumatized’ in the least by a popular athlete groping her at a party but devastated if he didn’t. What we maybe seeing here is Debra Ford’s revenge for not being accepted into the social ‘in crowd’ that Kavanaugh inhabited.
She is a useful idiot that they had lined-up clear back in 2012 to pull this stunt. For those not aware, the politicos knew Romney was going to pick him for SCOTUS if he had won, so they had her plant that story in a shrink-session, so it would be in her file. So after Romney threw the election, no one cared. Fast-forward to now, and good ‘ole Frankenstein dusted it off to use against Trump. These are despicable, deceiving people.
Why is no one discussing that Kavandouche is “one of them”, a Bush crony and a figure in the cover up of Vince Foster’s murder? I am convinced that this whole business is designed to A. distract everyone from focusing on the truths of his globalist servitude, and, B. Make The Right want him even more since The Left is fighting against his nomination so hard and so unfairly. Just like Gerald Ford was eventually rewarded with the office of the President of the United States for his part in the coverup of the Kennedy assassination, Yalie Kavendude is merely cashing in on the quid pro quo of his past transgressions on behalf of his masters. He’ll get appointed to the supreme court. But in the end no sane person is going to like what he does there.
Right on the money, Bob. He also was the brains behind the brainless W in crafting the ‘patriot’ act (W is making calls supporting him). They can castrate the fucker for all I care.
CC-it blows my mind that no one is picking up on these things…or simply doesn’t want to. Weird.
I heard on Fox news that trump wanted to nominate a judge favored by his sister-who I think is a judge also. When he got back to dc he was set upon by some gang of big shots and virtually forced to go with kavanaugh against his better instincts. It’s a laugh to think this establishment boy is a conservative in any real sense of the word-just another kennedy-breyer establishment operative.
Trump put out a list of the people he would likely choose for the court during the election. It is an excellent list. His older sister is a respected federal judge and if she helped him compile the list I say she has darn good judgement. His appointees are the best of the best constitutionalists out there.
You’re making my point. If the legal mind who buried the vince foster hit and worked the patriot act for W is “best of the best constitutionalists out there” then the constitution is a dead letter and kavanaughs are there to subvert it.
They are not constitutionalists; they are spinners of Administrative Law. Administrative Law has nothing to do with the Constitution. I really thought you were more informed than that reading your posts. But I guess I was wrong.
I’m not totally thrilled about Kavanaugh, but perhaps this treatment will help motivate him if he is confirmed…I think Clarence Thomas and his wife were permanently alienated from the Washington establishment, which was very good.
Good point. Kennedy periodically went squishy on us – probably in part because he wanted to be liked within the D.C. social scene. Kavanaugh – like Thomas – now knows he’ll never be thought well of by the libs. So why placate them at all? Fuck ’em.
Right on!
Writer thinks he’s against the elites but gives Kavanaugh a pass? Just another example of why we’re totally screwed.
I passed out at a party once and woke up to some girl sucking my dick. While i didnt stop her, it affected me(when the time was ripe), in the following negative ways…..
What bullshit.
Helped a girl I did not know from drowning on her own vomit , her pants were already down because she was attempting to piss when she fell ass over tin cups and started hurling . No sxual advances took place she was at that beligerant stage just before passing out . Another male friend who knew her poured her into her car he drove her home . I followed , we were at a field party when we got her dad to help carry her in he thanked us for being stand up men . Apparently this was not the first time daddy’s little girl found herself in such a condition . I guess I could never be a Supreme Court Judge .
Regarding #29, there’s no such thing as a “lie detector”.
It was rigged….Ask her if she would undergo a lie detector test by a neutral expert…
rigged by who?
1) Dr. Ford, at what age did you lose your virginity?
2) Were you drunk at the time?
3) Have you ever had an abortion?
4) You’re a straight-up ho aren’t you?
Apart from the grandstanding, not a bad start…
“It appears that multiple men have come forward to the Senate Judiciary Committee claiming that they were actually the ones who had a brief encounter with Ford back in High School – not Kavanaugh. It seems that she was in this sort of situation numerous times back then.”
… due process requires impartial judges and juries. But the people who will vote to confirm Kavanaugh have largely already made up their minds on the matter of his alleged sexual assault. As the attorney Harvey Silverglate wrote in a recent column, “the Kavanaugh case is not about justice; it’s about power… The scenario playing out on Capitol Hill and in the press, the bottom line is simple: whoever has the most votes, whichever political party holds (for the time being) the most power, will determine what the ‘truth’ is. There will be no civics book ending. No analogy to a real judicial proceeding will be possible.”
A full investigation of this matter, and a fair adjudication of Kavanaugh, would require a significantly revised process.
This isn’t due process—this isn’t even an honest attempt to determine what actually happened.
.
http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/27/christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh
A comment above said he had a sister who was a respected judge. Respected by who?
Administrative Law is the law of mammon. It is subject to all kinds of interpretation that comes along in the mind of man to suit who ever controls the levers of power. This is what the fight is all about.
Conversely the Constitution is common law and has one meaning that is easy to read by anyone with a moderate education.
Administrative Law that was made the law of the land since the middle of the 20th century has no foundation other than contracts (Uniform Commercial Code) and when used to rule on social issues like Roe vs Wade is only based on opinion. Why do you think the Supreme Court is so divided? It has become a political court! And it’s judges don’t use the Constitution as a guide because the Constitution is silent on these issues.
So the picking of a supreme court justice is nothing but a circus. This man is not a saint or a man of hubris; he is a spinner of Administrative Law. People that don’t like his spin are distracting his nomination. This is what this hakaka is all about.
I have no respect for the Supreme Court anymore because I see how it has descended into rulings about mammon issues that have nothing to do about the Constitution. I will be glad when this side show is over.
Bingo, give the Stuck a cigar. Hasn’t anybody seen Gangs of NY? Or as Tony Montana said, first you get the money, then you get the power…
Well that wasn’t very informative except that the GOP is so afraid of being ‘mean’ that they let an obviously neurotic middle aged woman who looks 10 years older than her 53 years ( drink much Ms. Ford?) sniffle and gulp down two glasses of water, at least one cup of coffee and coke ( two twenty ounce bottles of it) to keep her mouth from drying up and her voice cracking as she repeated her phony allegations.
Traumatic? Come on if every girl who went to a beer party with older teenage boys and had to fight off a drunken boy trying to make out with them was so traumatized they had to seek therapy 35 years later every girl in America who wasn’t Medusa like ugly would be in ‘therapy’. Its what teens do. They can’t be suave playboys or buy attractive women expensive gifts they have to grab and paw and gauge the reaction.
Far worse can happen. In my beer embalmed youth I saw a girl pass out and have her pants pulled down and a can of Hormel chili poured on her vagina. The family dog was then invited to come eat! At a party I brought a video camera to tape the strippers performance. One of the ‘guests’ passed out on a sofa with his mouth wide open. The next day I informed him I had made a video of “Phil’ putting his dick in the open mouth. It didn’t happen and I told ‘Mark’ it didn’t be he could never be sure. A couple of years later I caught Mark going through my video cassettes looking for the damning video and I again assured him it didn’t exist but how could he be sure?
The point, I guess, is never get so drunk with ‘friends’ you don’t know what you are doing or they are doing to you.
I watched. the full hour of Kavanaugh’s testimony and the first round of questioning.
Truly, it was like seeing someone hold up a cross in a room full of vampires.
No doubt this a ConJob. I’d love to know when Ford lost her virginity. $100 says it was before this supposed party. To see her now, ugh. It’s not the years, it’s the mileage.
Yes, but they’re all highway miles.
A.K.A. truckstop miles, if you know what I mean.
Every time I see Sen Richard Blumenthal, I think of the stalker on that circa 1980s movie “Body Double”:
?
Stop attacking a Vietnam hero. A man of integrity and principles.
If Judge Kavanaugh was a reliable vote for the Democrats’ Holy Sacrament of Abortion, Dr. Ford could have shown up with his DNA on her blue dress, and the press would advise women to put on knee pads and line up to service him.
Senator T-Bone Spartacus (D-Corruptopia) admits doing what Kavanaugh has been accused of and denies. What is the penalty?
I hope when Feinstein’s Treason case makes it to the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh helps her hang. And does it with a smile.
Democrats throw a tantrum over being exposed as worthless subversives.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/someone-on-capitol-hill-just-doxxed-republican-sens-mike-lee-orrin-hatch-and-lindsey-graham
I don’t know who will be President after Trump, but their campaign slogan will probably be ‘Death Camps For Democrats.’
Let’s face it, no matter WHO was nominated, as long as they weren’t a flaming liberal halfwit the left would be able to produce *someone* female with an *allegation*. Or am I wrong?
Yup. And if it had been a white female nominee, they’d have used the racist card somehow.
The databasing of social media for today’s teens will fill the files of tomorrow’s nominees.
If we fall for this “allway believe the woman” nonsense, all women will become monsters to all men.
FEINSTEIN.
Q
JUST ANOTHER (Seek & Destroy) DAY AT THE OFFICE FOR DEMONRATS
No collusion here people.
That couldn’t be Ford’s lawyer with Clinton.That would mean Democrates would ru
https://mobile.twitter.com/TracyLynn128/status/1045507277699076096
Evil No More
Curious, she could have ruined his career before it even started by filing attempted rape/assault charges before he took his bar exam, why didn’t she think of that? I think she was the fastest cheapest hit the dems could come up with, sometimes I have to laugh thinking that they don’t even know they are being played, it’s like watching a two year old have a meltdown in the grocery store, trump slides them the “shriek of the week” and they are so busy winding themselves up they don’t even see what’s in the other hand.
https://www.dangerous.com/49836/records-show-dr-ford-is-not-a-licensed-psychologist-may-have-committed-perjury/