On October 9, 2018, the Independent published a clever Indy 100 article that translates for men, why so many women have been so viscerally upset over the fast tracking by GOP US senators of the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become the next US Supreme Court justice, especially after a credible, reputable female witness Dr. Christine Blasey Ford was discounted by them as being confused over her sexual assault allegations against a drunken Judge Kavanaugh and his friend while they were in high school.
Here are excerpts from the article, “A writer used a perfect analogy to explain why women are so opposed to Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment:”
“The past few weeks has arguably been one of the most uncomfortable and controversial in the history of American politics. “
“Last week, Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed as a Supreme Court justice following an FBI investigation in sexual assault claims made against him by Dr Christine Blasey Ford.” (Even FBI Drector Chris Wray has admitted that FBI probe had strict limits placed on it by White House, at recent US Congressional hearing.)
“Although they are still claims and allegations, the way that Ford was treated during the investigation and afterwards was a little hard to stomach.”
“Yet for some, who haven’t experienced sexual assault, sympathising with Ford proved to be difficult, when it really shouldn’t have been.”
“In an attempt to fix that, writer A.R. Moxon, composed a clever analogy for men, to explain why it’s so painful for women to hear stories like Ford’s and for them to be basically ignored.”
“His Twitter thread cleverly uses the painful experience of a man being kicked in the genitals as a way of perfectly explaining why most women will object to Kavanaugh’s appointment, guilty or not guilty.”
Gronda, Dr. Ford said it well when she testified under oath after passing a lie detector test. She said her testimony may not be heeded, but she had to give it. That was lost once Kavanaugh came in later with his righteous indignation and the GOP Senators fawned over him. He lied. He was belligerent. He was accusational. The one who appeared judicious was Dr. Ford.
But, she was not the only one. There were two others who came forward and neither were brought before the committee. That was by plan. Make it a one on one match. Defeat the one and you win. It really is that simple.
Ramirez was interviewed by the FBI, but they were told to limit the time and scope of the process. And, Trump in his infinite wisdom said Swetnik was not credible, so don’t interview her. Why?
The Republicans used a case of the few lying accusers against the vast ocean of accusers who are hurt. And, the even larger number who never go forward. Because a small percentage falsely accuse that means none can be trusted?
We never got at the truth. The vetting was limited as was the FBI investigation. We do know Kavanaugh lied under testimony. Why?
LikeLiked by 2 people
The GOP lawmakers used to get away with these tactics as a lot of it was sub rosa but this is not the case anymore.
Senator Collins tried to play the old sidestepping tap dance show around the truth but her days in the US Senate will end when she’s up for reelection. As a pro-choice republican, she sold out most women in her state when she voted to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to be the next US Supreme Court justice.
The reality is that how leaders deal with accusers like Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez and others, will be viewed from the perspective of the “MeToo” movement. There has been a c-change.
Here’s reality on Planet Earth in the USA. When a woman comes forward with an allegation that she was sexually assaulted by a particular assailant, she has to swear out a statement which is a form of evidence but it is a first step. Dr. Ford took the extra step by passing a polygraph test which is also evidence. This is evidence that can’t be used during a court hearing but it does bolster her credibility.
The irony here is, that it was Judge Kavanaugh who ruled in favor of law enforcement using polygraph testing as a tool.
After a claimant has signed and sworn to her / his accusations, then comes a competent investigation to corroborate or to contradict her/ his assertions. You can’t short cut this second step while claiming to have treated Dr. Ford with fairness which is what the GOP senators did.
They did not fool most American peoples with their tactics.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Gronda, I wrote a post earlier today about smugness and righteous indignation. Judge Kavanaugh and his Senator groupies showed faux righteous indignation. To be frank, the more who fawned over him comvinced me something was amiss. It was akin to the famous fawning Trump cabinet meeting. Keith
LikeLiked by 2 people
Comments are closed.