[Cog]

Those therapy notes were not released to the committee and no one is going to get them. Ford released a redacted version or a summary to the Washington post. But she could not remember which she provided them. I'm of the opinion they don't exist.

[Tanada]

Provided that the agents are instructed to investigate ONLY those claims which were made before todays vote in committee it should take them about two days to review all the interviews they have already done and do the interviews they need to do with Kavenaugh, Ford and those she claimed were witnesses for her accusations.

The FBI also need to interview her therapist. His written records show that Ms. Ford claimed she was assaulted by four boys. In the hearing she testified under oath that there were two boys, and claimed that the therapist made a mistake in his medical records.

An FBI interview with the therapist will reveal if he knows the difference between two and four, and if he took his notes properly. It is possible Ms. Ford lied under oath about this key issue----indeed, the notes taken during the session constitute strong physical evidence that suggest ms. Ford lied under oath to the committee on this important point.

A similar discrepancy exist with regard to the lie detector test. According to the record, Ms.Ford said during the lie detector test that there were three people in the room with her during the assault----two boys and a girl. Again, a significant discrepancy on a key point with her sworn testimony to the committee.

Cheers!

Medical records are privileged information and require specific subpoena issues in order to be taken unless voluntarily surrendered. Too many things in medical records can be used by attorneys in court to cast doubt on a witness even when they are perfectly normal and legal.

[rockdoc123]

what I am surprised about is no one seems to have brought up the concept of "false memory". This was a big thing for a while in the psychiatry side of things. As I remember the psychiatrists were arguing that a lot of the therapists who were less well trained (according to them) were actually creating memories for individuals when they interviewed them. I seem to remember there were a few cases of parents being charged with child abuse when in fact it never happened, it was a memory that was "implanted" (I don't know a better word for it) by the child psychologist.
I wonder if there isn't something here that is a product of false memory or false attribution.

That being said I have to ask....does anyone here know a woman of this age who speaks with a child's voice as she did? I thought that bizarre but hey, I'm an old guy and I don't get out that much.

[jedrider]

what I am surprised about is no one seems to have brought up the concept of "false memory". This was a big thing for a while in the psychiatry side of things. As I remember the psychiatrists were arguing that a lot of the therapists who were less well trained (according to them) were actually creating memories for individuals when they interviewed them. I seem to remember there were a few cases of parents being charged with child abuse when in fact it never happened, it was a memory that was "implanted" (I don't know a better word for it) by the child psychologist.
I wonder if there isn't something here that is a product of false memory or false attribution.

That being said I have to ask....does anyone here know a woman of this age who speaks with a child's voice as she did? I thought that bizarre but hey, I'm an old guy and I don't get out that much.

Yes, rock, she is a psychologist. I think she knows about false memories very well.

Women speaking in a child's voice? I know of adults speaking with a child's vocabulary and you know them, too. Yes, there are singers who maintain their high pitch voices into adulthood. You don't seem to listen to music very much. Maybe, you need to get a life? Only kidding. Another thing I've heard is that Americans won't have sympathy for a woman who was obviously spoiled at that young age. Yeah, that obviously applies to Kava-naught, as well. Yes, I have no sympathy for her, certainly, but I believe her story.

[Newfie]

I believe she believes her story. The mind is a strange and wonderful device. It can do all kinds of tricks. If you think about something long enough it becomes the same as a memory of a real event. You can convienced yourself it happened. As a psychologist, Ms Ford knows exactly how to frame a memory so that it conforms to the profile of a traumatic event that is seared into her mind. Not saying she did or did not do that, just that it exists in the realm of possibility.

Did it happen? Who knows, it could be as she described or some version of it or pure fantasy. Ditto Kavanaugh.

A couple of things stand out for me. She came “forward” anonymously. She did not want to be made public. But she got a lie detector test? From a exFBI agent, more to the point was he a polygraph expert? Are polygraphs allowed in court any more? I thought not? She has a expert lawyer. That does not come cheap. Who is paying for that? Why has her internet presence been scrubbed? Maybe “they” needed time to do that before going public hence the delay? Would not the FBI want to see the scrubbed internet presence?

Maybe I’m paranoid and see something odd where there is nothing. I don’t know.

I never circulated in those elevated circles so I’m outta my league trying to understand what the cultural mind set was for them as teenagers.

Again, I’m not wild about Kavanaugh, and I don’t think one side is more noble than the other. I guess I just see more risk to Ford by this investigation than I do to Kavanaugh.

In a personal sense, I pity them both, but Kavanaugh has something to gain out of it. I can only see Ford loosing, I don’t see where she has anything to gain.

[jedrider]

Just a quick reply here. I did NOT say I believed 'she believed'. I explicitly stated I believed that she told THE truth, not HER truth.

Sexual Assault is being bandied about like Bill Clinton played with the word 'IS'. That's another topic completely, though.

I am listening a little to some of the testimony (very little, as I am not that into this business at all, i.e. I'm not a wonk ).

I must say Kavanaught strikes me as one slimy political operative and I would not believe his testimony one bit. He is quite elusive on purpose (and I believe he has adequate memory as well).

[Plantagenet]

I have to ask....does anyone here know a woman of this age who speaks with a child's voice as she did? I thought that bizarre but hey, I'm an old guy and I don't get out that much.

I thought the exact same thing. Either Ms. Ford is still traumatized by whatever happened to her 38 years ago, or she wants to pretend she is still traumatized.

My guess is she is just pretending to be traumatized. After all, she claimed she was so traumatized that she couldn't bear to get on an airplane and fly, and yet she got on airplane and flew to DC for this hearings, and reportedly she travels a lot by air as part of her job.

Clearly she is lying about being unable to fly.

So what else is she lying about?

Cheers!

[evilgenius]

I have to ask....does anyone here know a woman of this age who speaks with a child's voice as she did? I thought that bizarre but hey, I'm an old guy and I don't get out that much.

I thought the exact same thing. Either Ms. Ford is still traumatized by whatever happened to her 38 years ago, or she wants to pretend she is still traumatized.

My guess is she is just pretending to be traumatized. After all, she claimed she was so traumatized that she couldn't bear to get on an airplane and fly, and yet she got on airplane and flew to DC for this hearings, and reportedly she travels a lot by air as part of her job.

Clearly she is lying about being unable to fly.

So what else is she lying about?

Cheers!

So, you've never flown next to somebody who is afraid to fly? Get real. What I said about him tacitly admitting to being a Republican shill is the only thing that matters. Even if this whole thing is a sham, he admitted that. Oh, not in so many words, so everyone who already takes that side's position in their own minds won't allow that to sink in. You and Cog are the two people who most ought to see the truth in what I am saying. Come on, the Clintons! For crying out loud.

[Plantagenet]

So, you've never flown next to somebody who is afraid to fly?

I've never been heard of anyone who testified under oath that she was so traumatized that she was claustrophobic and couldn't fly....who it turns out flies all the time.

Obviously she can get on a airplane and fly and she was lying when she pretended otherwise.

Cheers!

[evilgenius]

So, you've never flown next to somebody who is afraid to fly?

I've never been heard of anyone who testified under oath that she was so traumatized that she was claustrophobic and couldn't fly....who it turns out flies all the time.

Obviously she can get on a airplane and fly and she was lying when she pretended otherwise.

Cheers!

Uh huh, so you haven't watched someone you don't know pop pills or drink themselves into oblivion, or simply chatter at you incessantly?

[vtsnowedin]

I doubt that they will come up with any new evidence in seven days. The Dems have already made an all out effort to make their case. This is just a stalling tactic.

[Newfie]

Evil,
He may well be a Republican shill, I suspect that’s why he was picked. Apparently he has been a high SCOTUS choice since 2008/Romney. I very much dislike that idea. Whatever party is in place will pick a shill.

But that also means the Ds have had a looong time to review him and come up with objections. They knew this was coming.

Hopefully, and it’s a big hope, once in the court he will be a free man, free from politics, able to vote his conscious.

What worries me more is that if the D’s fail, then it would take a very big man indeed to not harbor residual resentment. The D risk is they are making a bad situation worse. Theirs is a dangerous, high risk strategy.

[Tanada]

Just a quick reply here. I did NOT say I believed 'she believed'. I explicitly stated I believed that she told THE truth, not HER truth.

Sexual Assault is being bandied about like Bill Clinton played with the word 'IS'. That's another topic completely, though.

I am listening a little to some of the testimony (very little, as I am not that into this business at all, i.e. I'm not a wonk ).

I must say Kavanaught strikes me as one slimy political operative and I would not believe his testimony one bit. He is quite elusive on purpose (and I believe he has adequate memory as well).

I personally take sexual assault extremely seriously.

That doesn't mean I must accept the testimony of Dr. Ford specifying who her perpetrator was when she can not specify the location, year, or other circumstances with any clarity.

Memory is a vastly malleable aspect of the human mind and it is not difficult to associate someone you knew as a teen who is now everywhere in the news with an old memory of something awful that happened to you. The reason justice requires corroborating evidence is human memory is extremely fallible. The more time that passes the more fallible it grows until when we are elderly most of us suffer senility or even Alzheimer's syndrome.

If she named names in her counseling sessions before Kavenaugh was put up for appointment to the court then that would be troubling and require serious review. The fact that her memory has shifted several times (number of parties involved, other details) and did not name Kavenaugh until he was in the news is very troubling.

The fact that Dr. Ford refused to testify Monday because "She is afraid to fly" but then flew in to testify Thursday and under questioning admitted she had flown for vacation and business multiple times in 2018 already calls into question all her other testimony.

Look I am afraid of heights and absolutely loath flying. The last time I took a plane anywhere was 1 round trip in 2008 and before that I had only flown one round trip in 2006, one in 2005 and one in 1982. If you are actually "afraid of flying" you take every step possible to avoid it from career choice to choice of vacation destination. All of my aughties flights were under the impetus of a spouse I am no longer married to. You put me in front of anyone under oath and my flying experience supports my statement I am "afraid of flying".

If you lie about one thing, like flying, it automatically calls into question every other claim you make. Anywhere outside of the political circus that is Washington D.C. Dr. Ford would not be treated as a credible witness. The simple fact that her initial accusation was anonymous and she declined the offer to testify on Monday would have ended the matter in any court proceeding in a civilized country. Because this is the political circus and the Media is on the side of opposing everything President Trump does or says Dr. Ford has been held up as the standard bearer of that opposition despite the problems with her story.

Either people are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, or they are not. There are massive reasons to doubt Dr. Fords memory and no corroborating witnesses or physical evidence. Not even a 'dear diary the most awful thing happened today' entry from her youth. Absence of evidence is not proof of innocence, but it makes the whole case he said-she said which is not evidence of guilt.

[Tanada]

Evil,
He may we’ll be a Republican shill, I suspect that’s why he was picked. Apparently he has been a high SCOTUS choice since 2008/Romney. I very much dislike that idea. Whatever party is in place will pick a shill.

But that also means the Ds have had a looong time to review him and come up with objections. They knew this was coming.

Hopefully, and it’s a big hope, once in the court he will be a free man, free from politics, able to vote his conscious.

What worries me more is that if the D’s fail, then it would take a very big man indeed to not harbor residual resentment. The D risk is they are making a bad situation worse. Theirs is a dangerous, high risk strategy.

That is an excellent point. Up until the 1980's Senate review of appointed judges was very much a pro-forma event. The President of any period would choose a qualified candidate with no huge controversy well known to the public and within a few weeks or a couple months the Senate would vote that person be seated almost always with a massive majority.

Then when President Reagan started appointing judges things began changing, culminating with seats being left open in a lot of lower courts in 1988 because the Senate had hopes of a party change in the election that year. As part of that whole process Judge Bork was nominated in summer 1987 and was the first judge who got an extreme blow back from the Senate Democrats. It got so bad he rescinded his own nomination rather than continue the public humiliation of crooks and liars in elected office pretending they were pure while stirring up any and every objection to his character and qualifications they could think up. After Bush Sr. was elected it got worse and they tried it again with Clarence Thomas. I watched those hearings and it was pretty much the same routine as these ones, a man of good reputation who was politically opposed was suddenly accused of bizarre acts despite the very large number of women who had worked with and for him over the decades leading up to the nomination. One woman came forward with these claims and the media was fully in support of her testimony and opposed to Clarence Thomas. The D's were mostly onboard with the fiasco of her testimony and dragging Thomas name through the mud but in the end even the D party who were the majority voted to accept his nomination.

Now the D party who are in the minority are trying to play the same game on Judge Kavenaugh who has a pristine record without blemish. They already changed the Senate rules for passing nominations while President Obama was in office making it easier for the Senate majority to pass any nominee. What most people do not realize is the D senators delayed so many Bush Jr. nominations that there were a lot of court vacancies when President Obama took office. The D's then changed the rules on nominations and passed Obama nominees to fill all those Bush era vacancies in the court over the objections of the R party and those nominees are all lifetime appointments. Now that shoe is on the other foot they are screaming bloody murder and throwing tantrums like a bunch of spoiled brats.

If the 2018 midterms turn out like I expect and the R's hold the Senate there will be at least four years of President Trump appointments to fill vacancies in the federal courts with Senate support. The D's went out of their way in 1987 to start making the court as political as possible and reinforced that with their changes to Senate rules for appointments under President Obama. Now those choices are coming back to bite them and they don't like it.

[Plantagenet]

Another huge discrepancy in Ms. Fords account is her claim that when she went into a bedroom with the four two boys they locked the door and then one boy jumped on her and touched her boobie. She then says she escaped the evil boobie toucher and fled out the door.

But earlier she says they locked the door. So how did she run out through a locked door? Is she lying or just not remembering things very well........?

There is a reason why every civilized country on earth has a "statute of limitations" that prevents prosecutions for crimes past a certain date. This isn't done out of mercy.....its done because PEOPLE CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED DECADES AGO. And even if they think they remember, THEIR MEMORIES ARE OFTEN WRONG.

Now the whole country is convulvsed over Ms. Ford's claim that Brent kavanaugh touched her boobie 38 years ago, when she can't remember much else about it, and even that little bit of "memory" contains contradictions and falsehoods. And no one else can remember this even happening at all.

This whole episode has been ridiculous. Nobody can remember exactly what happened 38 years ago. And yet the Ds are placing 100% credence in Ms. Ford's recollections, even though she can't recall much and what she does remember is bizarrely devoid of detail except for her claim that she's 100% sure it was Brent kavanaugh who touched her boobie.

This is another D political farce. They are destroying the reputation of a good man just for their own political purposes. Idiots like Sen. Cory Booker ("I am Spartacus") actually said Brent kavanaugh is "evil" and anyone who supports him is supporting evil. God what a moron.....and some Ds want him to be President. Ohmigod.

This is truly a revolting spectacle. I hope the Rs have the guts to stand up to the politics of character assassination and confirm Kavanaugh. Its our only hope for avoiding this kind of circus on every major appointment in the future. If the Rs don't stop it now, then next the Ds will be going back to grade school stories to judge the "character" of nominees. And after that they'll demand the FBI investigate what happened in nursery school.

STOP IT!!! STOP IT NOW!!! CONFIRM KAVANAUGH AND END THE FARCE NOW!!!!!

[Cog]

You have to admit the cleverness of Ford's accusation. By not remembering the month, day, or until recently the year this attack took place or the location, she avoids the situation where any of the players involved had a rock solid alibi. They might have been on vacation with the parents somewhere or involved in a sport in an away game. The people who owned the house could say they were rehabbing the house that summer. By not remembering who dropped her off and picked her up from the party and took her home 6 miles away, she doesn't need to involve anyone else in upholding this lie.

Why anyone finds this credible is beyond me. I could have come up with a lot better story. Remember this is supposedly an event that changed her whole life but any detail that would corroborate it is missing. Conveniently. Even the people who were supposedly there, all deny they were there.

[evilgenius]

As long as we are going to play the game of accusing people of something because of what they aren't like, I'd just like to say that Judge Kavanaugh lived a very unusual adolescence. How he avoided the raging hormones that the rest of male humanity suffer under during that time is beyond me. I guess I have to praise him for being such a strong man, when he was really too young to yet be a man. He must, therefore, be a gift from heaven. Listen, we all remember our pasts differently than they really were. If any one of you can recall the exact year that pretty much anything of life changing significant took place I applaud you. Denying excess is one way to avoid the lessons that those hormones can teach us, though. Because what they do, if we find that we can somehow not give in to them fully, is to teach us the power of symbolism. Learning that is critical, to understanding others who aren't like you, and to not becoming a nasty drunk.

[Cog]

My roommate at college was a Mormon. He told me he wouldn't be having sex until he married. And he did date non-Mormons. Some people have strong religious values about sex. Or alcohol or tobbaco.

[dunewalker]

Tanada mentioned Clarence Thomas. He has been one of the most stalwart conservatives on the court. He rarely has written an opinion, just votes with the conservative side. On another forum someone mentioned that if he hadn't been put through what he had during confirmation, he might have been a more neutral judge.

Some sources indicate that Christine Blasey Ford is employed by the CIA, heading the CIA internship program at Stanford University. Apparently her father, brother and grandfather all have worked for the CIA. Google Blasey CIA.

[dissident]

I have had negative indirect experiences with therapists. One of my high school friends developed issues and was violent to his family (a lot of psychiatric problems manifest during the teenage years). His shyster therapist must have latched onto me as some sort of causal factor or something (no I was not a thug engaged in bad influence on this individual, we were basically two science nerds and instead of going out boozing talked about general relativity). So this therapist basically killed our friendship. I would not be surprised if Ford was basically brainwashed by her therapist into believing something serious happened when this was not the case. Sex assaults are more than touching of a breast and if there was a gang attack it would have been serious (due to the nature of gangs).

Therapy is voodoo and nothing is stopping these shysters from manipulating their patients. In an ideal world it may well be different, but we do not live in such a world.