This is a well written article with some great points IMO. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mic...ton-keeps-finding-ways-to-denigrate-democracy I thought this was the juiciest part of the article: For one thing, the leak of the confidential letter Ford wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein must be treated as a crime. As several senators noted, the leak falsely weaponized a charge about a 36-year-old event, without having any corroborating evidence. Ford wanted to remain private, but the leaker wanted to create a public spectacle that pitted her and Kavanaugh against each other like two caged beasts. The leaker succeeded and provoked other accusers to make charges without evidence, leading to a cascade of smoke but no fire. Among the casualties was the presumption of innocence, a bedrock of our legal system and Western civilization itself. Ford and Kavanaugh both say their families received death threats. For another thing, the role of Ford’s lawyers must be investigated. One was hired at the recommendation of Feinstein’s office, and another represents McCabe — suggesting this was a political operation from the start. Moreover, the failure of those lawyers to turn over key documents to the Senate reeks of bad faith and perhaps something far more sinister. Less surprising was that the fiasco revealed how the liberal media keep behaving like battering rams against Trump. The wild stories about Kavanaugh in high school and college, coming from NBC, The New Yorker and others aimed to paint him as too toxic for confirmation. Shamefully, Ivy League law schools piled on. Their failure to stop him is cause for relief, but nothing more. The media and academia embarrassed themselves again, but show no signs of ending their blatant bias. The Times, of course, is the leader of the wolf pack, and it’s worth revisiting the end of its 2016 debate story. After saying Trump “sputtered” in one exchange, it wrote that the evening was “a last-ditch attempt by a fading candidate, Mr. Trump, to save himself.” Clinton, on the other hand, was said to be “reaching for not just a win but a mandate,” and the article concluded with obvious support for her certain victory. “I would like to say to everyone watching tonight that I’m reaching out to all Americans, Democrats, Republicans and independents,” she said, “because we need everybody to help make our country what it should be.” Two years later, she bears a huge responsibility for the disaster before us. If she really wants to help, Clinton should publicly admit that Trump won the election fair and square.
I have so many observations about this debacle. Why is there none of her students from all these years coming out to vouch for her? How about co-workers and staff from all these years? I would like to see into her past the same way that we saw Judge Kavanaugh's past. What was she like? Has she always been as meek and skittish as she appeared? What has been her political activism through the years? On and on and on..... Why don't the dems provide any backup to their excoriating contention that she is such a truthful victim? I have so many things that I would like a reasonable democrat to explain to me, but I've yet to find one.
Perfect... Now you know why most girls and women don't speak up when they are pinned down and groped in an attempted rape.
I have a pet theory.. It goes something like this. Times have been super hard for the Clintons. Their ability to fund raise, decimated. Their access to the halls of power, cut. And yet, it appears they still have enormous power. Enough to convince the ranking minority member of the judicial committee to cozy into a scheme where ms Feinstein's own future freedom had to be risked. Somehow, ms Feinstein was convinced to conceal from the members of her committee.. in violation of the committee rules.. evidence that there was an allegation.. promised the "victim" total anonymity.. and then, leaked the information anyway to the press, who pursued the "victim" relentlessly forcing the "victim" to then publicly accuse the SCOTUS nominee. Ok, so that's probably the what. now for the why? I assert that the #MeToo movement is so stifling to the Clinton fund raising efforts, that it's effectively cutting into their ability to fund the super lavish lifestyles they enjoy, (separately for sure these days) and the camp came together for the good of the fund raising to attempt to sufficiently undercut the veracity of the #MeToo movement by first foisting ms Ford on the public, and then ensuring two stupendously non credible rider allegations would be made in support of the first. And, because those allegations were so resoundingly stupid, baseless, and otherwise incredible, that the #MeToo movement would be irreparably be harmed. And once entirely discounted, folks like mr Weinstein could once again flow money in the direction of the Clintons. And Bill could hit the speaker circuit again, etc. I'm sure Hillary thanks the "dream team" of democratic senators in the assist. ms Kamala and Cory were certainly giving it their best shots. And the best part? Who would ever dream that the Clintons were this base, and vile?
Well, I for one, certainly do wish they would speak up. I thought the women's movement has been teaching the empowered woman to do that. What happened?
Is that little gem reserved for only attempted rapes? Why not just sexual batteries, or other potential crimes? You know what? Women do speak up. Often. This misogynistic relegation to the 1940s just isn't working for your team. It's transparent, and defies what we know to be the world we live in today. How about this, ladies. and gents (yes there are men who are assaulted), don't just sit there. Own it. Get law enforcement involved. it's the only way folks who actually do predate on you will ever be held accountable for their actions.
Most rape victims don't speek up because historically, those in power, especially in law enforcement, often discount rape allegations. My best friend was almost raped in collage, and DID turn it into the police, but because her rapist was on the football team, they basically saw her as a liar trying to set up a lawsuit against the school, and said the fact that it was clear she hadn't had sex recent, when she had a medical exam done, that there was no rape. Because they considered rape to only include forced sexual intercourse.
I do believe that the definition of rape IS still considered to be just that in most states. Have we changed the definition of rape now? It appears that I honestly don't know.
