If the standard to determine guilt relies on a person’s convenient memory then what is to stop a similar fuzzy memory from exonerating a person?
First, Dr, Christine Blasey Ford came out of the woodwork to claim Supreme Court Nominee Judge Kavanaugh attempted to rape her 35 years ago in high school. She remembers who and what but where and when are not completely in her memory banks.
Of course, it just so happens that the where and when can be corroborated with actual proof while the who and what are simply one person’s story. But, why quibble?
Now we have another woman stepping out of the shadows who claims Judge Kavanaugh exposed himself to her in college. Deborah Ramirez, says she explicitly remembers it was Kavanaugh but admits she does not fully remember the alleged incident because she was intoxicated at that time.
So, she remembers who and what but, again, all other details are a bit fuzzy. People need to stop drinking at high school and college parties so they can preserve these memories. The Democrats, media, and anyone who is against Judge Kavanaugh’s appointment believe these women.
They do not believe the 65 women who signed a letter defending Judge Kavanaugh. They do not believe the woman who contradicts Ramirez’s account of the alleged incident. They do not believe Judge Kavanaugh.
Likewise, Republicans, Conservatives not named Flake, and anyone who is in favor of Judge Kavanaugh being appointed to the Supreme Court believe Judge Kavanaugh and those defending him and not the two women who lack evidence.
What if the women with no evidence are telling the truth? How often have we’ve seen innocent people destroyed because no one believed them? Lyricist Kerry Livgren sums it up best “The years will steal away our youth; a lie can change but not the truth.”
There is no way anyone can determine with any certainty who is telling the truth. The truth will not change but the truth as defined by politicians in this case depends on what side of the aisle you are on.
I do not believe the two women or Judge Kavanaugh will have a fair trial. They’ll make their respective cases but everyone already has made up their minds and we are simply waiting for the circus to begin.
The track record for women who come forward with hopes of toppling powerful men is not good. Just ask Juanita Broderick, Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, and Bobbie Williams. Ask Anita Hill.
They had their day in court…..but at what cost?
Interestingly, the women who had the most evidence against their assaulter –former President Bill Clinton – had their lives destroyed far more than the one with no evidence against Justice Clarence Thomas. Anita Hill had her memories.
Justice Thomas likened his day in court to a “high tech lynching.” The Democrats are getting the noose ready for Judge Kavanaugh.
Judge Thomas is a Supreme Court justice and Judge Kavanaugh hopes to join him. But at what cost?