[Dear Professor _____]
Could you explain what specific details pushed you to conclude that the Professor Blasey's ( https://www.paloaltou.edu/faculty/christine-blasey ) allegations are not merely "detailed," but "highly detailed," and not merely "credible," but "extremely credible"?
Thanks,
Seth
Seth Barrett Tillman, My Post on CONLAWPROF on Professor Christine Blasey's Allegations Against Judge Kavanaugh, New Reform Club (Sept. 18, 2018, 3:51 AM), https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2018/09/my-post-on-conlawprof-on-professor.html.
9 comments:
She's a woman. He's a man.
She's a Lib. He's a Con.
Res Ipsa Loquitur.
Mr. Tillman, there’s a progression that obviously you are too stupid to understand. If a woman makes an allegation, it automatically is highly detailed and extremely credible.
Oh, wait, that’s true unless the allegation is made against a Democrat. Bill Clinton skated away from these allegations. But you make such an allegation about a Republican, and just watch the Republicans who should fight it run for cover.
There’s a word for such Republican politicians. Maybe many words, but they all are synonyms of gutless.
I apologize for calling you stupid, and you can tell, by the rest of my comment, that I did not mean it.
Skip the intermediary and go right to the source - Satan
And yes, I am serious.
She is credible because she is the victim. Progressive orthodoxy dictates that victims of sexual assault never lie.
Which presents a conundrum. According to the Mary Turner Project (http://www.maryturner.org/database.htm), about a quarter of recorded lynchings in Georgia were driven by a charge of rape. A more extensive, but not complete, database (http://www.thiscruelwar.com/the-long-list/) has a bit more than 7% of the lynchings nation-wide being based on charges of rape or attempted rape. (In my count, I left out some charges that might be euphemisms, such as "scared a white girl".)
If sexual assault victims never lie, then all those rape charges must be true. If true, then the only problem with lynching is a process violation: the whole "trial" part of the process was skipped. The end result was the same: the rapists were executed. But I've always been told that lynching was bad, unjust and racist, that innocent people were killed. What to believe: lynching is wrong, or rape victims never lie?
The Kavanaugh case also confuses me on the issue of whether convicted felons should have to identify themselves as such on employment forms. The argument is that they have paid their debt to society, and should be given a clean slate, Assuming, arguendo, that Judge Kavanaugh did indeed assault a girl when he was seventeen: should that matter to us at all, more than three decades later? Hasn't he clearly reformed his life? If we are supposed to forget about felonies of which adults were convicted by a jury, why are we required to have ever present in our mind something a 17-year-old boy did once?
Or. Maybe 17-year-old Kavanaugh didn't assault a 15-year-old girl. Maybe some people who claim to be victims of sexual assault do lie. Maybe a single act by a 17-year-old (if true) does not define the totality of a 53-year-old man. Maybe dispensing with process, as was done by lynch mobs, is unjust, whether the accused is guilty or innocent.
She's credible because Kavanaugh is a Republican. See Karen Monahan (or, for that matter, Juanita Broddrick) as apparent non-women.
Because Kavanugh needs to be defeated. At any cost.
Kavanaugh is being burned on the Altar of Abortion. It's an altar we helped build by enabling people willing to kill their own babies. And we are surprised these same people are willing to rip out the Senate and Supreme Court in defense of their selfishness? Did we really expect the abortion fanatics to be less monstrous?
However this settles out, we need to tear that altar down.
The women who hate men are behind thus. They murder their unborn or when they do have the kids raise the boys to be soyboys or enuchs. (LGBT)
Kavanaugh is neither and Trump is neither so these black widows want to destroy what they can't control.
There is only one "fact" in this case which can be corroborated.
By her own admission, she lied to her parents regarding her whereabouts on the alleged incident.
If we are to believe that any of her testimony is true, this is the only fact which was able to be corroborated by her own testimony.
Would it not be prudent to depose her parents and brothers regarding their recollection of any changes in their daughter's demeanor, dress, mood, grades, and sociability during the summer of her 15th year? Would it not be prudent to question family members regarding the possibility that she was abused in the past?
Another glaring question is the state of her mental health. In the case that she suffers from paranoid delusions, she may indeed be telling "the truth" that has no bearing on reality. Are there mental health records from her teen years to corroborate any of the claims made? Did she every speak to a counselor at school about this matter?
As a psychologist, one might assume she has had access to testimonies of victims of sexual assault. It is possible that the detail that she provided was not her own?
As a behavioral vision scientist, my observation is that when Blasey was asked to recall the alleged events that occurred, her eye movements indicate prevarication. My professional opinion is that she was lying.
I also observed that she read from a script. She should be asked under oath who wrote this script. A heartfelt reading of another person's account might sound very compelling and detailed but it is not credible unless it has been corroborated that the person reading the script is the same one who wrote it!
My impression is that Blasey wants to retire to New Zealand, according to her husband's account, and she is quickly raising the funds to do so with her GoFundme and other new sources of revenue.
Her claim of "Fear of Flying" as an excuse for not appearing to testify in person is thoroughly invalidated by the fact that that she routinely flies for vacations and her work obligations in Hawaii. The ease with which she misrepresented herself in this case destroys her credibility as a witness. It would seem that she is able to prevaricate with absolute composure. Sociopaths are able to pass lie detector tests.
Post a Comment