66

Anita Hill Redux

Advisor:  And so far, the only negative thing we’ve found is from some guy who dated her when she was sixteen.

BURNS:  Ah. And?

Advisor 3:  He, uh, he felt her up.

BURNS:  Bah! Not good enough!

The SimpsonsTwo Cars in Every Garbage and Three Eyes on Every Fish (1990)

Well, the attempted high tech lynching of Judge Brett Kavanaugh proceeds apace.  His anonymous accuser has come forward.  She is Christine Blasey Ford, a Professor of Clinical Psychology at Palo Alto University in California.  Here is the letter she wrote to Senator Feinstein:

July 30 2018
CONFIDENTIAL
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Dear Senator Feinstein;
I am writing with information relevant in evaluating the current nominee to the Supreme Court.
As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak.
Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in the early 1980’s. He conducted these acts with the assistance of REDACTED.
Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school.
The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.
Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a short stair well from the living room. They locked the door and played loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help.
Kavanaugh was on top of me while laughing with REDACTED, who periodically jumped onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh’s hand over my mouth I feared he may inadvertently kill me.
From across the room a very drunken REDACTED said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from “go for it” to “stop.”
At one point when REDACTED jumped onto the bed the weight on me was substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other. After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home.
I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see REDACTED once at the REDACTED where he was extremely uncomfortable seeing me.
I have received medical treatment regarding the assault. On July 6 I notified my local government representative to ask them how to proceed with sharing this information . It is upsetting to discuss sexual assault and its repercussions, yet I felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything.
I am available to speak further should you wish to discuss. I am currently REDACTED and will be in REDACTED.
In confidence, REDACTED.
A few observations:
1.  She told no one about this at the time this allegedly occurred.  No complaint was made to the police.
2.  She does not recall the date, other than it occurred sometime in the early 1980’s.
3.  She cannot recall the address of the house.
4.  She first mentions this when she and her husband were in couples therapy in 2012.
5.  The notes of the counselor indicate that four boys were involved and no mention is made of the name Kavanaugh.  (Ford claims that the counselor was mistaken and her husband says that she mentioned the name of Kavanaugh at the time.)
6.  On the date of the incident she claims to have drunk only one beer, but she can’t recall how she got home that evening.
7.  She scrubbed her social media postings prior to coming forward.  Apparently she is a Democrat, contributed to Bernie Sanders in 2016 and has been a critic of the Trump administration.
8.  She claims that writer Mark Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh was present.  He denies that what she is alleging is true.
9.  Her parents were involved in a foreclosure action in 1996, as the Defendants, in Maryland case 156006V .  The Judge on the case was Martha Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh.  The case was dismissed by the Plaintiff early in 1997.
Docket Date: 02/04/1997 Docket Number: 10
Docket Description:
Docket Type: Ruling Status: Granted
Ruling Judge: KAVANAUGH, MARTHA G
Reference Docket(s): Motion: 9
Docket Text: ORDER OF COURT (KAVANAUGH, J./RICE, M.) THAT THE VOLUNTARY MOTION TO DISMISS IS HEREBY GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE AND THAT THE BOND FILED BY HARRY J. KELLY AS TRUSTEE SHALL BE RELEASED AND RETURNED FILED. (COPIES MAILED (

Needless to say this is a very weak accusation.  However, we are currently engaged in a national hysteria called the Me Too movement, and the Democrats will attempt to use this to torpedo the Kavanaugh nomination.  Failing that they will use this as a campaign issue against the Republicans, part of their War on Women meme.  That the reputation of a very good man will be dragged through the mud over an allegation that gives every sign of being false is of course of no consequence to them.

Share With Friends
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    1
    Share

Donald R. McClarey

Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three and happily married for 35 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.

66 Comments

  1. So many inconvenient lapses in memory in her story. Witness to collaborate the story? Humm.

    There is so much on the line for the future of legalized killing of the unborn that, forgive me if I’m wrong, that the left would concoct a flimsy story at this point of the process.

    Call it a cheap trick.

    Saul’s #13 seems about right in this case;
    13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

  2. “9. Her parents were involved in a foreclosure action in 1996, as the Defendants, in Maryland case 156006V . The Judge on the case was Martha Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh. The case was dismissed by the Plaintiff early in 1997.”
    Her parents could have asked that Judge Martha Kavanaugh be replaced by another judge to hear their case. They did not. Why not?

  3. Doubtless because their daughter had told them zero about the alleged incident. Her father was an attorney and if he had been aware of the alleged incident he almost certainly would have moved for a new judge to be appointed to the case.

  4. I heard they got a polygraph test by a retired FBI agent. Was that guy’s name Andrew McCabe or James Comey?

    This is a subversion of and an insult to the #MeToo movement. Women actually are assaulted, raped, and killed. And, NY Senator Chuck Schumer says, its’ “An insult to the women of America.”

    Judge Kavanaugh’s disqualification is that he likely (he cannot say it) believes and supports (unlike the USCCB) Church Teaching on abortion: a sin against the Fifth Commandment.

    The alleged incident never happened. BK’s unindicted co-conspirator states the incident did not occur.

    I have a two-word answer for this liberal pomp and circumstances: “Juanita Broaddrick.”

    A pox on all their houses.

  5. Well, 27 years ago, the lawfare and oppo research components of the Democratic Party wouldn’t have been egregious enough to try to trade in an accusation made 36 years after the fact concerning an ‘event’ which supposedly occurred when the accused was a minor. The nature of the supposed event is such that the account could be readily embellished to make it appear it was something it wasn’t. That the woman in question claims to have had years worth of psychotherapy consequent to this is a fair piece of evidence toward the thesis that she’s quite loosely wired.

    Since the ranking minority member on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the floor leader of the Democratic caucus in the Senate have elected to exploit this, we’re at the point where the state party chairmen in Alaska and Maine need to pick up the phone and remind Sleaza and Susan that the Democratic Party has declared total war and you girls need to pick up a rifle or you’re going to be treated like enemy aliens back home. This isn’t a policy dispute anymore.

  6. What’s next on this charade, a “just found” old letter attesting to the existence of two impeccable eye-witnesses who observed its occurrence, Theodore Kennedy and William Clinton, with a side-note reference to one Chris Dodd? It is said to have an attached imprimatur by a Reverend Jeremiah Wright?

  7. A “ray of hope” and iota of sanity from Sen. Collins via The Hill and Instapundit, “Collins asked if Democrats believed Ford, ‘why didn’t they surface this information earlier,’ and if they didn’t believe Ford, ‘why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it?’”

  8. Radio guy last night read the story she told the therapist– it sounds like she’d been watching Law and Order: SVU and incorporated a plot into her story.

    Seriously, “I was victimized by four faceless yet powerful people who have gone on to become Very Important People so there’s no way I can possibly be expected to do anything against them”? Combined with not being sure of the year, or the location, or how many people there were, or….

  9. The hottest selling fragrance in the Halls of the Democratic party is D e s p e r a t I o n.

    Just a dab will do ya. Senator Feinstein is swimming in it.

  10. This is asinine! Just like Clarence Thomas. I am disgusted. Heck, even if Kavanaugh did something wrong 30 years ago or more, can we hold this against him now? Geez, I touched many a topless girl in bikini bars inappropriately, and sometimes got my behind tossed out by the establishment’s bouncer. Either let it go or prosecute William Jefferson Clinton for all the sexual abuse he did as governor of Arkansas and President of this country.

  11. Apparently episodes of Law and Order: SVU didn’t come up in any of the six comprehensive FBI background checks Judge Kavanaugh has been put through over his career.

    Calumny is a sin. Let us pray for the conversion of Sen. Feinstein.

  12. I think it is despicable that you use a Catholic forum to push a political agenda, just read your “point” she is a democrat, her parents were involved in foreclosure, she was drunk, etc , etc. The fact that he is against abortion and you believe Republicans are the jewel of the Catholic faith does not give you the right to do this. SHAME ON YOU ANDD ALL CATHOLCS WHO USE THEIR CATHOLIC FAITH TO JUSTIFY EVERYTHING !

  13. “even if Kavanaugh did something wrong 30 years ago or more, can we hold this against him now?”

    Yep. This is now; the 21st century.

  14. “I think it is despicable”

    I know, I know MR. However, as John Adams noted facts are stubborn things:
    “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

    Words to live by.

  15. Donald R McClarey wrote, ““Haven’t the courts refused to hear “he said, she said” cases?”
    No.”

    I have always understood the law to be very clear: Testis unus, testis nullus – One witness is no witness.

    As the Lord Justice-Clerk (Aitchison) said in Morton v HMA 1938 SLT 27:

    “It is a firmly established rule of our criminal law that a person cannot be convicted of a crime, or a statutory offence, on the uncorroborated testimony of one witness, however credible, except in the case of certain statutory offences where the Legislature has directed that the evidence of one credible witness shall be sufficient. Subject to these statutory exceptions the rule is inflexible. The law is stated in the clearest terms by Baron Hume in his Commentaries on the Law of Scotland respecting Crimes (Vol. II. p. 383) in the following passage: “No one shall in any case be convicted on the testimony of a single witness. No matter how trivial the offence, and how high so ever the credit and character of the witness, still our law is averse to rely on his single word, in any enquiry which may affect the person, liberty, or fame of his neighbour; and rather than run the risk of such an error, a risk which does not hold when there is a concurrence of testimonies, it is willing that the guilty should escape.” In this passage Hume was dealing with direct evidence, but he goes on to say (at p. 384): “It would not, however, be a reasonable thing, nor is it our law, that the want of a second witness to the fact cannot be supplied by the other circumstances of the case. If one man swear that he saw the panel stab the deceased, and others confirm his testimony with circumstances such as the panel’s sudden flight from the spot, the blood on his clothes, the bloody instrument found in his possession, his confession on being taken, or the like, certainly these are as good, nay, better even, than a second testimony to the act of stabbing. Neither is it to be understood in cases of circumstantial evidence, either such as the foregoing case or one where all the evidence is circumstantial, that two witnesses are necessary to establish each particular; because the aptitude and coherence of the several circumstances often as fully confirm the truth of the story as if all the witnesses were deponing to the same facts.”

    The Roman law was the same. (Dig. 22.5.12; Codex, iv. 20, 9)

  16. M. Rojas-

    God bless you.
    The sixty million reasons why I don’t buy the above subject matter as being creditable at this early stage of the allegation is not something I will ever feel shame for. On the contrary. Liberal or Conservative Catholic politicans that support the legalization of abortion on demand are..I repeat.. ARE a disgrace.
    If you naively think this was not planned to announce this allegation at this stage of the “game”….then God bless you dear soul and be very careful who you are voting for in November.

    Catholics that have no problem with RvW as law of the land will have a bigger problem come Judgement day. Bank on it!

  17. In the US a crime can be established on the evidence of one witness. Of course the trier of fact has to find the witness credible, and when it comes to witness credibility the conclusion of the trier of fact will usually not be questioned or second guessed by an appellate court.

  18. Here’s the anti-BK fanatics’ slogan, “Kill Babies, Not Roe.”

    Sorry M. Rojas your comment is fully counter-factual. Additionally, normal Americans (we elected Trump) don’t listen to totally-fabricated, moral-outrage from evil people, who, apparently like you, think it’s legitimate to murder 63 million (and growing) babies.

  19. Philip- zing, well said, re: desperation.

    *******

    MR-
    You look at a senator using, at most charitable, a mentally disturbed woman to attack a man with no evidence, and the one named witness is already being character assassinated for not believing a well known rape hoax.

    Assuming she’s not a cold-blooded liar, Professor Ford is most likely suffering the psychological effects that an assault would’ve had, made worse by polishing it into a powerful and building-block aspect of her middle-aged-to-late-adult life. This is a well known problem, and part of why “recovered memories” are so disapproved of– not only do they accuse the innocent, the accused suffer as if they were actually victimized.

    But what you find horrible is a blog of Catholics noticing that it’s an openly political move that uses a woman’s pain to destroy the life of a man because he opposes abortion?

    Look, I know “good is stupid” is a standard trope on TV, but it’s not in the Bible, especially not as an order from Christ!

  20. This is absolutely disgusting. Brett Kavanaugh has now had his reputation marred, forever- something this man doesn’t deserve. If the Republicans cave over a vague memory, there will never be another Republican nominee capable of being confirmed. Maybe there will not be a single one willing to stand for scrutiny; if they can conjure up allegations without evidence for any decade of your life.

    Very few of us are blessed to have led such spotless lives (even if what we may be accused is far less serious)…and I’m not holding my breath for a government of saints and angels.

  21. Another thought occurred to me as I read comments above. There is not a single one of us who can withstand the kind of scrutiny that Brett Kavanaugh is undergoing. We all did something in the past that we’re really ashamed of and want to be left in the Confessional where it belongs. Even you, Mr. Rojas. You are the typical Democrat hypocrite. IF Kavanaugh were Democrat, THEN his behavior would be A-OK as it was for William Jefferson Clinton and all the women with whom he committed adultery. Monica Lewiski is one of many. I don’t kid myself that Republicans are lily white pure. But it’s YOUR Democrat Party which vies with the Nazi Party for being the most heinous in crimes against humanity – the dismemberment and vivisection of the pre-born. Yes, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, both Republican women, are pro-aborts, but they are liberal feminist women! Their first allegiance is to libertinism for women, NOT Republican Party principles. They call that libertinism freedom and equal rights. They are as disgusting and perverse as any Democrat, and if they vote against Kavanaugh, then they will be doing nothing other than confirming themselves in being RINOs.

    I don’t like country club Republican hypocrites. But Democrats are truly evil.

  22. “We all did something in the past that we’re really ashamed of and want to be left in the Confessional where it belongs.”

    Not me Paul. I am perfect in every way. (Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission and the IRS please take note!) Tongue taken out of cheek, what this type of sliming will ultimately do is lower the quality of nominees and ensure that sane people will not wish to put themselves and their families through this. Kavanaugh is a family man and I bet if he knew it was going to be this bad he would have refused the nomination. Our sad country:

    “Horatius,” quoth the Consul,
    “As thou sayest so let it be,”
    And straight against that great array
    Went forth the dauntless three.
    For Romans in Rome’s quarrel
    Spared neither land nor gold,
    Nor son nor wife, nor limb nor life,
    In the brave days of old.

    Then none was for a party—
    Then all were for the state;
    Then the great man helped the poor,
    And the poor man loved the great;
    Then lands were fairly portioned!
    Then spoils were fairly sold:
    The Romans were like brothers
    In the brave days of old.

    Now Roman is to Roman
    More hateful than a foe,
    And the tribunes beard the high,
    And the fathers grind the low.
    As we wax hot in faction,
    In battle we wax cold;
    Wherefore men fight not as they fought
    In the brave days of old.

  23. One, This is a ploy to postpone the confirmation vote until (God Forbid) the democrats take majorities in the Senate and House.

    Two, I’m old enough (really that old) to remember when another lying woman destroyed the team and the young men’s lives of Duke University Lacrosse team. One of my sons attended HS with one.

    Think about it.

  24. Correct me Donald. The criminal files of juveniles are sealed against public inspection; closed when the person reached emancipation and adulthood. Why are Bret Kavanaugh’s supposed juvenile files being bandied about in the public domain? Something smells fishy, especially that the Democrats do not know or respect their own law. Voters in November must remember that the blind leading the blind both shall fall into the pit.

  25. The daughter of one of my friends was assured by a psychiatrist that she’d been abused by her dad.

    She wasn’t, it was objectively impossible,but she still carries the psychological scars…even after breaking free.

  26. Donald R McClarey wrote, “In the US a crime can be established on the evidence of one witness…”

    God keep my life out of their hands!

  27. “Why are Bret Kavanaugh’s supposed juvenile files being bandied about in the public domain?”

    He doesn’t have any juvenile criminal files. The confirmation hearing is not a criminal proceeding with procedural safeguards but rather an action of one of the political (elected) branches of the Federal government.

  28. Apparently MPS this issue is not without controversy in Scotland, at least in rape cases.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-25639645

    In Illinois a criminal conviction cannot be established soley on the defendant’s confession. There must be independent corroborative evidence to establish the corpus delicti, the commission of the crime. I was involved in a case a few years ago where the client’s conviction was overturned on appeal because the Trial Court inadvertently violated this rule.

  29. “He doesn’t have any juvenile criminal files. The confirmation hearing is not a criminal proceeding with procedural safeguards but rather an action of one of the political (elected) branches of the Federal government.”
    Can Bret Kavanaugh then sue for defamation of character? and why not?

  30. “She wasn’t, it was objectively impossible, but she still carries the psychological scars…even after breaking free.” Breaking free from her dad or from the psychiatrist? Subliminal suggestion.

  31. “Can Bret Kavanaugh then sue for defamation of character?”

    Sure he can, and be involved in endless litigation and discovery. Since he is a Federal Judge he almost certainly could not accept contributions to defray his legal costs while his adversary could. My guess is that his legal bill would be north of a million dollars in no time at all. Federal appellate judges make $211,200 per annum.

  32. Since “brevity is the soul of wit,” the only, appropriate response to this eleventh-hour, poisonous plot to defame a good man is, “She is lying.”

  33. She is lying.

    It is possible she isn’t “lying.” Maybe her therapist planted her “impression” or “feeling” that she was “assaulted” – whatever any of those words mean.

    “. . .whether an individual has undergone hypnosis (which can alter memories), has been diagnosed with particular psychiatric or other medical conditions that could affect memory, has suffered other traumatic events involving sex, has had a therapist who might have been suggestive, and so forth. Even if the Republicans had time to get all this information . . .” The cowards will not.

    She is lying.

  34. Two, I’m old enough (really that old) to remember when another lying woman destroyed the team and the young men’s lives of Duke University Lacrosse team. One of my sons attended HS with one.

    She was a prop.

    The wretched Crystal Gail Mangum was improvising to avoid a civil commitment proceeding. There was an incompetent SANE examiner at Duke University hospital who then passed it along to police. The police investigators included one honest cop and one shady cop, neither of whom were on board with the shenanigans of the district attorney’s office (one took early retirement afterward, while the other resigned from the force and returned to his home state) The real criminal was the district attorney, who thought he could ride the case to a victory in a Democratic primary he was then losing. He was assisted by two of the three judges who presided over proceedings regarding the case. One odd feature of the case was that the police chief seconded his officers to the DA’s office, placing them under the DA’s supervision. Any honest DA would have dropped the case within three weeks of the incident, when the report came in from the specialty DNA lab that CGM had the DNA of 4 or 5 men in her various orifices, none of them on the lacrosse team and none of them the three men she listed as ‘boyfriends’.

  35. The cost of an abortion?

    The reputation of a good man…to begin with.

    The serpent will dig it’s fangs into anyone who could save the lives of the innocent..and the souls of mother’s too. Mother’s who wrongful choose abortion.
    This battle is for souls… nothing else.
    We are witnessing the beast via liberal politicans and their whores.

  36. She is lying.

    If I’m not misunderstanding, she says she showed up alone at a gathering at an address with which she wasn’t familiar with young men she did not know. Not done in suburbs in 1982, when teen girls traveled in pairs or traveled in packs everywhere. You might travel to school alone, to your job alone, on household errands alone. If you were dating, he generally came to you or you met somewhere in a public venue. That’s the tell that the story has been manufactured or has been truncated in certain ways to make refutation difficult.

  37. ‘I think it is despicable that you use a Catholic forum to push a political agenda, just read your “point” she is a democrat, … ‘ MR

    I think it is despicable that democrats (especially those well paid to serve their country) are allowing themselves to be shown unhinged time wasters at a simple confirmation hearing for a man who believes in justice for all (them, too).

  38. One thing is certain: regardless of the truth of the accusation, Senator Feinstein deserves censure from the Senate for withholding the accusation from scrutiny for three months. Official Senate business has been crippled by this act.

  39. I HOPE NO ONE GIVES ONE PENNY TO PUBLIC TV OR PUBLIC RADIO WHEN THESE COMMIES BEG US FOR MONEY,,,,,,since NOV 2016,,,even the create channel which used to be free of bumber spot left wing propaganda has been nothing BUT,,,,,,you cannot escape rose red left wing doctriniare even on their cooking and hobby show create channel. it is the fall pledge drive season,,,,,forgeddaboutit.

  40. “If I’m not misunderstanding, she says she showed up alone at a gathering at an address with which she wasn’t familiar with young men she did not know. Not done in suburbs in 1982, when teen girls traveled in pairs or traveled in packs everywhere. You might travel to school alone, to your job alone, on household errands alone. If you were dating, he generally came to you or you met somewhere in a public venue. That’s the tell that the story has been manufactured or has been truncated in certain ways to make refutation difficult.”

    Now she is saying Art that one other girl was present. Her story keeps changing as most lies tend to do. My years as a teen were from 1970-76 and the girls I knew then would have laughed themselves silly at the idea of going to a “party” where strange boys vastly outnumbered the girls present. As you noted, girls tended to travel in packs, and at real parties would usually stay pretty closely linked. If there had been another girl at the “party” that Ms. Ford attended, Ms. Ford would not have been seeking a bathroom on her own as she alleges. I guarantee you the other girl would have been going with her to the powder room. The more you examine this tale, the more it seems like a concoction of a woman with an extensive fantasy life.

  41. “The more you examine this tale, the more it seems like a concoction of a woman with an extensive fantasy life.” -DM

    Yes.
    And with that fantasy life an agenda as well.

  42. Re: The Duke LaCrosse scandal. It was one evening during that story when we watched a professor from Duke explain that white American boys are programmed to want to rape black women. That’s when my second oldest popped off a quote I’ll never forget, especially as it becomes more true every day: ‘So I guess you can always tell a racist by the color of his skin?’ Think on that as you repeat it, and then remember it is all but official doctrine in our nation today.

  43. It is the mirror image Dave of the brutal black savage rapist from Africa image popular among white racists in the 19th century. The colors have shifted, but the underlying racism remains the same. The hilarious aspect however, is that many of the individuals spewing virulent anti-white racism are whites themselves, which is beyond pathetic. It reminds me of this scene from Gran Torino (language advisory):

  44. Yep. It’s amazing how quickly we’re embracing the notion that it’s fine to judge and condemn and destroy people based on skin color, national origins, gender or religion – you just have to get the right ones. The big difference seems to be that back in the old days, there were clearly whites who were racists through and through. And there were blacks who were victims of their racism, and fought the notion that they should be judged by their skin color. And there were whites who were against the racism of the day (an oft forgotten point). Today, there are those who say the same thing against whites that was said against blacks. There are whites who are saying it’s wrong to judge them by their skin color. But then you have those whites who are the first to say all whites are racist by virtue of their skin color. They’re the ones that are tough to grasp. This whole notion of demographic masochism. I can’t fine a historical precedent for it.

  45. One thing I keep hearing pundits say is: “Why would she do this, if she were not telling the truth? Her life will be destroyed, like Anita Hill”
    Anita Hill was offered jobs, given awards, movies were made about her life. Anita Hill was celebrated after her testimony against Clarence Thomas.

  46. Hill has never married, has no children, and has a simulacrum of a career rather than the real thing. Her professional writings are few and turgid. Currently, she is a professor of ‘social policy’ at Brandeis, which is almost as grossly comical as the position Julian Bond had on the history faculty of the University of Maryland. She has a juris doctor and no known training in statistics or policy analysis. If the trustees had been responsible, the faculty which hired her (with tenure, btw) would have been dissolved and discharged on 12 months notice. Trustees are never responsible.

    Hill ended up working in discretionary positions at the Education Department and the EEOC because she’d had a miserable time at a Washington BigLaw firm. She then went to the law faculty of Oral Roberts, an unaccredited school. Then she was picked up by the University of Oklahoma, the lack of a research degree or research publications notwithstanding. IIRC, she landed at Brandeis after a stint at Penn. She has none of the preparation that any of these places would ordinarily apply to a faculty hire.

    If Anita Hill had been honest with herself and others, she’d be shuffling paper in some federal agency, working at a small practice around Washington or Tulsa or Oklahoma City, in house counsel at some public agency somewhere, &c. Instead, she’s ‘professor of social policy’.

  47. Donald R McClarey wrote, “Apparently MPS this issue is not without controversy in Scotland, at least in rape cases.”

    There was an attempt some two years ago to change the law. The solid resistance of the Judiciary, the Faculty of advocates and the Law Society (the Solicitors’ body) saw it quietly shelved. Even the police were cautious, fearing it might lead to changes in the rule that a simple majority suffices for conviction.

    It is true that most successful prosecutions for rap rely on the Moorov doctrine. According to Moorov, where an accused person is charged with a series of similar offences closely linked in time, character and circumstances, the evidence of one witness implicating the accused in one offence may be taken to corroborate the evidence of another witness implicating the accused in another offence, each offence being treated as if it were an element in a single course of conduct. Moorov speaks of some “unity of intent, project, campaign, or adventure” and itis used in many cases.

  48. The hilarious aspect however, is that many of the individuals spewing virulent anti-white racism are whites themselves, which is beyond pathetic.

    1. Professional class whites sliming ordinary whites.

    2. Whites out of an academic subculture sliming whites from business sector families.

    If my own experience is any guide, faculty at selective institutions like Duke have a casual contempt for their students, one they do not apply to their own children or the children of those in their social circle. The children of the chaps who keep the HVAC system on their campus in good repair they despise if they give a damn about them. The racial angle is that you demonstrate your good taste by favoring people x+4 steps from you over people x+2 steps from you, so working-class blacks and working-class chicanos get plenary indulgences.

  49. NW DC all girl high school reunion is in OCT. It will be interesting to see if the Ford- Kavanaugh topic comes up in conversation. No surprise if they are still spouting the same or worse liberal BS as they did in the late 60s. My conservative dad drove me and another transfer classmate in from VA every day. Parties at someone’s house – not allowed. Mixer/sock hop at a boys school or coed Catholic high- yes a couple of times but my parents drove us and they waited all the while in the parking lot.
    Many in the NW/Chevy Chase crowd came from wealthy, privileged families and many felt entitled. Depending on the crowd Mrs. Ford hung out with, I don’t doubt that as a teen she went to parties without her parents’ knowledge in NW or Chevy Chase. At 17 and 100 lbs or less 1 drink could probably cause a buzz in a female teen. By the ’80s pot and other drugs were probably in use at an unchaperoned house party. Hence Ford’s fuzzy recollections. Hmm… under age drinking and illegal drugs – no surprise being reluctant to fess up to her parents or involve the police. Was she accosted? It’s probable at some party or parties depending on the amount of alcohol and drugs present.
    BUT given the reasons listed in previous comments it is really doubtful that Kavanaugh or his buddies were involved in her case. Too many holes in her tale. Now Feinstein is not even sure Ford is telling the truth. Maybe the senator now sees possible blow back for her rep and re-election bid.

  50. If Ms. Ford is really looking for justice and has a real case to press isn’t Senator Feinstein’s office a strange place to seek it? Especially seeing as Sen. Feinstein has been sitting on it for some time. It doesn’t look like they are showing any due diligence in this matter.

  51. Fandom-hunting, man-hating school psychiatrist.

    She’s not seen the inside of a medical school or a residency program. She’s a psychologist and the ‘university’ at which she teaches is a stand-alone graduate school for clinical psychologists. Her dissertation (at the University of Southern California) was on a clinical topic, though her publications (quite numerous) have been all over the map. What’s curious is that you find 89 papers on GoogleScholar she’s associated with, but she isn’t the lead author on any of them.

    What’s interesting to me is that this woman grew up in an intact family (with a parents apparently still married), is quite extensively educated, is married to a quite extensively educated man who is employed as a pharmaceutical executive, lives in the most affluent commuter belt in the country, lives in an affluent town in that commuter belt where an ordinary suburban tract house will sell for north of a million bucks, is trained as a clinical psychologists and employed to train clinical psychologists, and she’s in couples therapy. For years on end. SMDH

  52. We’ll likely never know what happened or didn’t happen. What we do know is that we are living in a moment when the characterization of my alleged 1977 punch to the jaw of Vince Damico can escalate from high school fist fight to criminal battery to attempted murder to murder in a single blog thread. At least Vince says I slugged him, but his big brother Nick swears it was Richie next door. It was 40 years ago so heck if I remember. I do not recall if beer was involved, but the odds are good. Pot too.

  53. What is really fun Mike is when you have a 40 plus year old memory of an event and then you receive solid evidence that your memory of the event is completely in error. I have had that happen to me a few times. I think that we often have memories of memories and they deteriorate over time. The strangest thing however, is the inconsequential events that sometimes stay jammed in one’s memory. One of my earliest memories is pulling out a plug and seeing the blue electrical discharge. Another early memory is viewing Liberace playing on television. I sometimes think our memories use certain memories like milestone markers without considering their intrinsic importance.

  54. We’ll likely never know what happened or didn’t happen.

    No, we’ll never be 100% sure, but one is not 100% sure of a great many things of greater consequence. Life goes on.

  55. Don, agreed on all counts. Memory is demonstrably unreliable, as every husband is regularly reminded.

    Art, no question. The larger tragedy to me is that even in the unlikely event that Professor Blasey’s account is entirely truthful and accurate, it still amounts to a classic example of the sin of detraction.

Comments are closed.