This page was last updated on December 11, 2018.
You can learn more about BCR’s leftster management here. “Leftster” is the combination of leftist and gangster, inspired by the left-originated “bankster.”
Carl Davidson: “Perhaps. But journalism can be both partisan and accurate. That’s the kind I try to do.”
Carl Davidson: “BUT I ALSO BELIEVE IN TRUTH TELLING.”
As I do from time to time, I let this topic fall off my radar screen. I wrote the bulk of the reviews at the time of the hearing but updated them in a few places. This resulted in some tense inconsistencies I didn’t want to spend time getting in sync. Please accept my apology.
Carl Davidson 9/27/18 @ 1:30pm: “KAVANAUGH SHOULD JUST THROW IN THE TOWEL. The testimony of Dr. Ford, his victim, has blown his case away. But as an old red, a former West VA miner, once told me, ‘the only way to defend opportunism is with more opportunism.’ So I’m looking forward to his setting himself up for perjury charges later today.”
[RWC] Based on what does KD assert, “The testimony of Dr. Ford, his victim, has blown his case away?” As noted previously, no one has corroborated Mrs. Ford’s (CBF) claims and her testimony didn’t change that fact. The real reason KD wants BK to “throw in the towel” is he suspects CBF’s accusations won’t hold up, despite his public remarks to the contrary.
One of the commenters wrote, “8. More specifically, Ford and Kavanaugh’s mutual friend Leland Kaiser [sic] says while she does not remember that party, but she believes everything her friend Ford said about it. She has stated this to the press and it came up in testimony today.” False. In addition to not remembering the party, Leland Ingham Keyser (LIK) says she didn’t/doesn’t know BK.
According to CNN, “On Saturday night [9/22/2018], her [Leland Ingham Keyser] lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee. ‘Simply put,’ Walsh said, ‘Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford. The lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford’s.”
After the Senate hearing, CNN reported, “Ms. Keyser does not refute Dr. Ford’s account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford’s account,’ Keyser’s attorney, Howard Walsh, wrote in the letter, which was sent to the committee overnight Friday. ‘However, the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question.’”
During the hearing, staff counsel Rachel Mitchell asked CBF, “OK. And when you – when you did leave that night, did Leland Keyser – now Keyser ever follow up with you and say hey, what happened to you? … I’m talking about like the next day.” CBF responded, “Oh no, she didn’t know about the event. She was downstairs during the event and I did not share it with her.” According to CNN, “Ford told the [Washington] Post she described the alleged incident in detail for the first time” in 2012 during “couples therapy with her husband.”
Howard Davidson (HD) 9/27/18 @ 4:17pm: “he’s going to turn the tables into a he said she said display. This, I think, is the Republican plan, and I think it will work. We know it’s an obstruction of justice, unfair, or whatever to not have the other witnesses testify and receive more information. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. Better keep a close eye on three senators. I’m not optimistic.”
[RWC] “he’s going to turn the tables into a he said she said display … and I think it will work.” Duh. That’s what happens when an accuser has no evidence to support their claim.
In a comment in a different thread, KD wrote, “My guesstimate is the GOP will pay a heavy price. Any woman who experiences a sexual assault will see them as the party where she has to ‘prove’ it, or see the claim ignored …” Does KD think “guilty until proven innocent” should be the law of the land? Keep in mind CBF was not asked to “prove” BK assaulted her. As for any crime, CBF was simply asked for info to help corroborate her accusations. As of this writing, it’s been two months since BK was sworn in and still none of CBF’s accusations have been corroborated, either by the press or law enforcement.
Steve Cohen 9/27/18 @ 6:03pm: “I think you may be right. All the GOPs have blamed Feinstein for delaying release of Ford’s memo and that accusation has gone totally unrebutted. Kavanaugh has been allowed to stonewall questions he doesn’t want to answer and Dems have not fought back against this in any effective way. Sorry to say all this. Doesn’t look too good.”
[RWC] What’s to rebut about DF not sharing CBF’s allegations with the committee? DF first spoke with CBF on about July 23rd and received her letter on July 30. DF didn’t acknowledge the letter’s existence until September 13th, the day after The Intercept published “Dianne Feinstein Withholding Brett Kavanaugh Document From Fellow Judiciary Committee Democrats.”
Carl Davidson 9/27/18 @ 4:48pm: “Senator Durbin has him dissembling, refusing to give answers to questions asked, giving answers to unasked questions.”
[RWC] Pure BS. It’s sad KD doesn’t believe his followers can handle the truth. BK has had six previous FBI background checks over the years, including the one for this appointment. Except for a few seconds at the beginning, though, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) spent his entire five minutes badgering BK to call for yet another FBI background check, this time focused on CBF’s accusations. BK responded, “I - I welcome whatever the committee wants to do, because I’m telling the truth.” This isn’t something new; BK’s been saying this ever since he learned of CBF’s accusations.
That wasn’t good enough for DD, however. DD wants BK on record specifically asking for an FBI investigation. My guess is DD was trying to set a precedent. For example, it’s pretty much a guarantee the wacko allegations will continue. When the first supplemental FBI check returns “clean,” DD will go back to the well. Should BK not support that check, DD would say “why not; you supported the previous supplemental FBI checks, didn’t you? Do you have something to hide?” The goal is to delay BK’s confirmation beyond the upcoming election in the hope Democrats become the majority in the Senate.
DD said, “And you can’t have it both ways, Judge. You can’t say here at the beginning … If there is no truth to her charges, the FBI investigation will show that. Are you afraid that they might not?” That is, BK couldn’t plead his innocence unless he demanded another FBI background check.
BK didn’t bite.
Carl Davidson 9/27/18 @ 5:10pm: “Insight. People who talk about ‘beers’ the way he did here are likely to be alcoholics still in denial.”
[RWC] Amazing! I wonder if Dr. KD would agree people obsessed with skin color the way he is are likely to be racists still in denial.
Carl Davidson 9/29/18 @ 7:48am: “The Dem maneuvers are working only because they have a case at the heart of it, and until Dr. Ford decided to put her name on it, they didn’t. But you can also look at it as payback for the blatant GOP disregard and blocking of Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland. My guess is we’ll find out that if he’s not simply lying, Kavanaugh will be shown to suffer from alcoholic blackouts. Dirty tricks or not in getting her to that hearing, once there, her testimony was ‘compelling,’ as nearly everyone says. Kavanaugh made the error of submitting his calendar for that summer. I think the FBI will go deep into the July 1 notes. Keep in mind that ‘I don’t recall’ or ‘I have no knowledge’ are legal terms to avoid perjury (they can also just be true), but they are not assertions that the attack on Dr. Ford did not happen.”
“Payback for the blatant GOP disregard and blocking of Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland?” Whether or not you agreed with the Senate Republican handling of the Merrick Garland (MG) nomination, the Republicans were honest about their action and didn’t attempt to destroy MG’s career, life, and family.
Wow! KD took only two hours, 38 minutes to worsen his diagnosis. Apparently, diagnosing BK as an “alcoholic still in denial” wasn’t enough. Now, “Kavanaugh will be shown to suffer from alcoholic blackouts.” What’s next?
“Dirty tricks or not in getting her to that hearing?” Sure.
Carl Davidson 9/29/18 @ 7:58am: “This gives some context. … https://portside.org/2018-09-28/keg-parties-and-assaults-women-catholic-high-schools-washington-area-break-culture”
[RWC] Part of the “context” is this statement in an NBC News interview of a BK accuser: “NBC News was unable to independently corroborate Swetnick’s claims and has not spoken with anyone who says they saw Swetnick at parties with Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh has said he does not know Swetnick and has called her claims a farce.”
Mick Bargerstock 9/30/18 @ 1:21am: “CARL, SHE NEVER WANTED TO PUT HER name on it , she’s a victim here , but it’s of the DNC.”
[RWC] As I wrote elsewhere in this review, I believe CBF was determined to get herself in front of the judiciary committee come Hell or highwater, but on her terms.
Carl Davidson 9/30/18 @ 10:34am: “Brandon is what we call an ‘ultraleftist,’ Mick. He’s given up on the working class we have, or most of it. He’s waiting for a Red Army to emerge from capitalism’s final wreckage. He has revolutionary anger and principles and hates the Dems probably more than your crew, but not much of a plan. Now you see why I’m sometimes labeled ‘the right wing of the hard left.’”
[RWC] A guy who once wrote “Communism is indeed a distant utopia by current standards. I view it like the North Star, it gives us a sense of direction to stay the course.” is “sometimes labeled ‘the right wing of the hard left?’” Sure.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity. <g>
© 2004-2018 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.