In all of your meticulous research, did it escape your notice that Ford at first reported the matter to Feinstein but opted not to come forward with it publicly?
Right. Both Feinstein and Ford herself decided to sit on it until the last minute in order to drag out the confirmation as long as possible.
She took a lie detector test administered by a former FBI agent, which she passed.
Lie detector tests are junk science. A psychologist would know that.
Listen, we debated all this when it happened. There was a
long-ass main thread on this and several smaller ones.
In any case, Ford failed, Kav was confirmed. Get over it already.
Two months after disclosing the matter to Feinstein, she decided not to go public, since she was convinced Kavanaugh would be confirmed regardless. Days after that, she was outed in the press. For some reason, she didn't want to become a heroine to the "radfems" that you are so obsessed with. Rather, she wanted the matter dropped but had little choice after it became reported.
That is your interpretation. Mine is that she waited until the last minute in order to delay the confirmation. Which she did.
She had reported the matter to Senator Feinstein at the beginning of July but, understandably, wanted her name kept confidential.
Nothing understandable there. If you make serious allegations, you should stand behind them.
They hobbled the FBI's ability to investigate and rushed the nomination through. The FBI never even interrogated Kavanaugh or Ford on the matter--the two people who had firsthand knowledge of it.
Again, had Ford come forward in July, there'd been time to run a more in-depth investigation. Which I doubt would have uncovered anything more than "he said, she said" anyway.
So, yes, I think that a real investigation might have confirmed or disconfirmed details that never came to light except as rumors in the press and on social media.
How would they have done that? There is no physical evidence, just recollections of people from 35 years ago.
After the Kavanaugh confirmation, the investigation became moot, especially since Trump's DoJ was obviously never going to investigate Kavanaugh.
As if the Biden DOJ is any less partisan! This is what happened recently, where a DOJ prosecutor basically acted as another defense attorney simply because he agreed with a #BLM arsonist's politics.
Judge goes below guidelines, gives 10-year term to man who set deadly Lake St. fire during unrest
Minnesota Star Tribune said:
A federal prosecutor told the judge he saw the defendant as a protester, not a rioter, and argued for leniency for a Rochester man who was accused of setting a deadly fire in a Lake Street pawnshop soon after George Floyd's death.
The 10 years of prison time given to Montez T. Lee Jr., 26, in U.S. District Court in St. Paul last week fell well below federal guidelines and follows
his guilty plea to arson in connection with the fire that engulfed the Max It Pawn store in the 2700 block of E. Lake Street on May 28, 2020, three days after Floyd was killed while in police custody in south Minneapolis. The remains of Oscar Lee Stewart Jr., 30, of Burnsville were
recovered from the rubble nearly two months later. An autopsy found that Stewart died of smoke inhalation and excessive burns.
This prosecutor would not be excusing this arson were it committed by a Proud Boi or a January 6th rioter. But he considers #BLMers "protesters, not rioters" even when they set deadly fires. I think it is likely Montez Lee would not have been prosecuted at all had Trump's DOJ not charged him already. Easier to sweep stuff like this under the rug before the prosecution is started in the first place.
And let's see how much prison time, if any, NYC firebombing lawyers Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman get. I doubt it will be much.
Minnesota Star Tribune said:
[Prosecutor Thomas] Calhoun-Lopez invoked the words of Martin Luther King Jr., champion of nonviolence during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, and noted that King told CBS-TV in 1966, "We've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard."
MLK also said that "riots are socially destructive and self-defeating". And the "unheard" ignores the fact that blacks have orders of magnitude more political and social power and visibility than in the 60s. If he is excusing #BLM riots, why not the January 6th riots? Those who participated also see themselves as "unheard". No, we must condemn all rioting, and not pick and choose based on politics and skin color.
Btw, this also shows that Merrick Garland is not really a moderate, when he is ok with his prosecutors exhibit rank viewpoint discrimination.
Still, I feel that it would have been a good idea to have a thorough FBI investigation of the matter rather than a rushed superficial investigation that failed to question either Kavanaugh or Ford about the facts. Luckily, we have the right wing blogosphere to do all the research for them.
