Did the Democrats Betray Christine Ford?

[Jerry Shugart]

Christine Ford was assured by the Democrats that if she didn't want her name revealed then it wouldn't be. At the time when her name was leaked to the newspapers the only people who knew about the existence of the letter Ford sent to Dianne Feinstein were Democrats.

Here is more about how this all came down:

Late in the hearing today there was an exchange involving Sens. Cruz, Cornyn, and Feinstein over who leaked Christine Blasey Ford’s letter to the media. It began with Sen. Cruz accusing Democrats of leaking the letter to the media. “Dr. Ford told this committee that the only people to whom she gave her letter were her attorneys, the ranking member, and her Member of Congress,” Cruz said. He continued, “And she stated that she and her attorneys did not release the letter which means the only people that could have released that letter were either the ranking member and her staff or the Democratic Member of Congress…That is not a fair process.”

At that point, Sen. Feinstein asked for time to respond. She again claimed she kept the letter private as Dr. Ford had asked. “I held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward,” Feinstein said.

Next, Sen. Cornyn asked permission (from Grassley) to ask Feinstein a question. “I believe what you just said,” Cornyn said, adding, “Can you tell us that your staff did not leak it?”

Feinstein replied that she didn’t believe her staff would leak it but said she hadn’t asked them. A member of her staff leaned forward and whispered something to her and Feinstein then said, “The answer is no.” “Jennifer reminds me I’ve asked her before about it and that’s true,” Feinstein said, referencing the staffer behind her.

So who did leak the letter? Well, the process of how it came out wasn’t that clear cut. The first mention of the letter appeared at the Intercept on Sep. 12:

Different sources provided different accounts of the contents of the letter, and some of the sources said they themselves had heard different versions, but the one consistent theme was that it describes an incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman while they were in high school. Kept hidden, the letter is beginning to take on a life of its own.

Eshoo passed the letter to her fellow Californian, Feinstein. Word began leaking out on the Hill about it, and Feinstein was approached by Democrats on the committee, but she rebuffed them, Democratic sources said. Feinstein’s fellow senators want their own opportunity to gauge whether or not the letter should be made public, rather than leaving it to Feinstein to make that call unilaterally. The sources were not authorized to speak on the record, and said that no senators on the committee, other than Feinstein, have so far been able to view the letter.​

Ryan Grim the author of that piece seems to have spoken to Eshoo’s office and probably to Democrats who were trying to get a look at the letter but who hadn’t seen it yet. This afternoon, Grim clarified on Twitter that his awareness of the letter did not come from Feinstein or her staff:

Nor did she or her staff leak the existence of the letter to The Intercept. After our story, she turned it over to the FBI, which placed it in his background file, which meant that it became widely available and soon after it was leaked to CNN​

So Feinstein’s office may not have leaked the initial word of the letter but it almost certainly came from Democrats, either in Eshoo’s office or on the committee. Word of the letter that apparently prompted Feinstein to turn it over to the FBI which then meant the entire committee would have access to it. By the next day, reports were circulating offering details about the contents of the letter.​

For the rest of the story click here:

http://voxbox.rocks/dianne-feinstein-i-didnt-leak-dr-fords-letter-to-the-media/​

The Democrats are the biggest group of hypocrites who have ever lived on the face of the earth. They shed crocodile tears over Dr. Ford at the same time they are stabbing her in the back!

This whole ugly affair is going to back-fire on the Democrats in a big way! Kavanaugh will be confirmed and the Republicans will keep both the House and the Senate. Then they will put Hillary in jail where she belongs, along with a large group of thugs from the Justice Department, FBI, and CIA. Then Trump will be re-elected!

 

[ok doser]

...

This whole ugly affair is going to back-fire on the Democrats in a big way! Kavanaugh will be confirmed and the Republicans will keep both the House and the Senate. Then they will put Hillary in jail where she belongs, along with a large group of thugs from the Justice Department, FBI, and CIA. Then Trump will be re-elected!

:banana:

 

[grit]

Did the Democrats Betray Christine Ford?

I do not believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. I did not find her testimony credible, so I'm unsure there was a betrayal regarding the letter in question.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The silence of the Democrats on this forum is deafening!

Where is their outrage about the abuse heaped on Dr. Christine Ford by their own party?

I guess they care nothing about reforming a once great party!

 

[grit]

um... I probably should disclose that I'm a conservative life-long Democrat who voted for Pres. Trump.

I think it's likely important to remember that Dr. Ford is also an active Democrat who has had motive for the entire period of the 'revealed' claim against Judge Kavanaugh. It's likely the attachment of his name to this allegation long predates this now public accusation and his consideration for the SCOTUS, but it's also telling I think, for me, that Dr. Ford made no such attempt toward 'justice' regarding Judge Kavanaugh prior. And the way and timing of how these allegations were made seems ideally scripted for the stated goals of the Democratic leadership, in a most vile and disingenuous fashion, from the time of the announcement of the choice of Judge Kavanaugh by Pres. Trump. I'm not so accussing Dr. Ford of coordinating this with her fellow Democrats, but neither do I find it beyond the realm of probability. That she 'seemed' forced to publicly out her allegations is an aspect of this debacle that the Dems would have wanted from the start, because it indeed adds an air of credibility to her claims.

Having said that, I remain respectful of both the Rule of Law and the unacceptable predicament in which many, even most women historically find themselves when it comes to matters of sexual abuse and finding justice this side of the grave. There's every possibility, even probability that Dr. Ford has been sexually abused at some point in her past.

And as toward Judge Kavanaugh, I'm not a Roman Catholic, nor a Yale or ivy school alum (mine was a religious education throughout), nor a drinker of beer or any other alcoholic beverages. I have absolutely no personal experience with his culture or the effects that getting drunk has on memory and recollection of events. I think it's quite likely that given the role alcohol has played in his formative years of high school and college there were probably times he was drunk - that's also not an accusation, just a probability. I did not find every point of his testimony credible, but to the specific allegations and anything preemptive or forbidding his appropriateness for the bench I found him trustworthy. In years prior, even with unsubstantiated charges, a judge such as Judge Kavanaugh would almost unanimously be approved.

And as a conservative Democrat without a voice in Washington, I'd completely agree there's no internal momentum of leadership toward reforming the Democratic party into it's former values and Christian principles.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

And as a conservative Democrat without a voice in Washington, I'd completely agree there's no internal momentum of leadership toward reforming the Democratic party into it's former values and Christian principles.

I appreciate your honesty and frankly, I am a little surprised that there are not more Democrats who voice your concerns. At least that would give me hope that the party of lawlessness can be restored back to the good old days of Truman and JFK.

 

[grit]

It's a subject for another thread, but "Grit" comes from being a Southerner. You're likely aware that Lincoln's Northern and Republican aggression decimated the American South. One may justly claim with more evidences here before us that I bear a grudge and lack a forgiving heart. but it's really simply a matter of historical perspective that greatly differs from the 'truth' many other Americans claim. Mostly.

 

[ok doser]

I figgered you sold newspapers :idunno:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

It's a subject for another thread, but "Grit" comes from being a Southerner. You're likely aware that Lincoln's Northern and Republican aggression decimated the American South. One may justly claim with more evidences here before us that I bear a grudge and lack a forgiving heart. but it's really simply a matter of historical perspective that greatly differs from the 'truth' many other Americans claim. Mostly.

I too grew up in the South and changed my mind about Republicans when I finally realize what party was responsible for most of the racist policies and laws which were in force then--the Democrats. Their southern Senators did their best to water down Eisenhower's civil rights bill and they did a good job, unfortunately! Then JFK was elected and was on the way to be a good President and was planning on pulling out of the Viet Nam war. Then he was assassinated by people who were controlled by the man who took his place--LBJ

Johnson's partner in crime, the CIA and the members of the Military Industrial Complex, all worked together to get the USA in a huge, costly war. 50,000 men of my generation were killed there and the motive was nothing but money and it was all made possible by LBJ!

So I was against the Democrats early when I saw what was really going on in Civil Rights and then with Johnson's policies I became even more solidly Republican. And what went on with Obama's Justice Department, FBI and CIA scares the "you now what" out of me.

 

[Jonahdog]

I too grew up in the South and changed my mind about Republicans when I finally realize what party was responsible for most of the racist policies and laws which were in force then--the Democrats. Their southern Senators did their best to water down Eisenhower's civil rights bill and they did a good job, unfortunately! Then JFK was elected and was on the way to be a good President and was planning on pulling out of the Viet Nam war. Then he was assassinated by people who were controlled by the man who took his place--LBJ

Johnson's partner in crime, the CIA and the members of the Military Industrial Complex, all worked together to get the USA in a huge, costly war. 50,000 men of my generation were killed there and the motive was nothing but money and it was all made possible by LBJ!

So I was against the Democrats early when I saw what was really going on in Civil Rights and then with Johnson's policies I became even more solidly Republican. And what went on with Obama's Justice Department, FBI and CIA scares the "you now what" out of me.

finally found that telegram from LBJ to Oswald, huh?

 

[MrDante]

um... I probably should disclose that I'm a conservative life-long Democrat who voted for Pres. Trump.

I think it's likely important to remember that Dr. Ford is also an active Democrat who has had motive for the entire period of the 'revealed' claim against Judge Kavanaugh. It's likely the attachment of his name to this allegation long predates this now public accusation and his consideration for the SCOTUS, but it's also telling I think, for me, that Dr. Ford made no such attempt toward 'justice' regarding Judge Kavanaugh prior. And the way and timing of how these allegations were made seems ideally scripted for the stated goals of the Democratic leadership, in a most vile and disingenuous fashion, from the time of the announcement of the choice of Judge Kavanaugh by Pres. Trump. I'm not so accussing Dr. Ford of coordinating this with her fellow Democrats, but neither do I find it beyond the realm of probability. That she 'seemed' forced to publicly out her allegations is an aspect of this debacle that the Dems would have wanted from the start, because it indeed adds an air of credibility to her claims.

I have never heard anyone dismiss the men who waited 30 and more years to report the abuse they suffered at the hands of Catholic priests. No one suggests that their wait to make a public accusation is "telling" or that their stories are scripted or somehow connected to vile or disingenuous goals of others.

The implication that since she didn't run to the police then it must not have happened. the reality is that most victims of sexual assault don't report it. This isn't because the survivors are making false claims or because what happened to them wasn’t a big deal. It’s because what happened is a very big deal. Many survivors fear the repercussions of speaking out — the shaming, stigma, and retaliation. They fear that that if they come forward, they’ll only have to suffer repeated trauma at the hands of the legal system and have nothing to show for it afterward — and lets face it they’re not wrong to have this fear.




“Thousands of people who have had their lives dramatically altered by sexual violence have reached out to share their own experiences with me and have thanked me for coming forward…At the same time, my greatest fears have been realized—and the reality has been far worse than what I expected. My family and I have been the target of constant harassment and death threats. I have been called the most vile and hateful names imaginable." Dr. Christine Blasey Ford

 

[Jerry Shugart]

finally found that telegram from LBJ to Oswald, huh?

No, I looked at the evidence and the only person who had the power to cover up the crime in the way it was covered up was LBJ.

I guess that you have tricked your mind into actually believing the "magic bullet" theory!

I guess you have tricked your mind into believing that the doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital in Dallas were all wrong when they described a large exit wound in the back of the head!

I guess you have also tricked your mind into believing that Clint Hill, the Secret Service agent who was in the back seat with JFK on the way to Parkland, was also wrong when he described a large exit wound in the back of his head.

More likely you don't know a thing about the assassination!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I have never heard anyone dismiss the men who waited 30 and more years to report the abuse they suffered at the hands of Catholic priests.

Have you ever heard anyone make an accusation against someone and that accusation was denied by all the people who were supposed to be there?

The attorneys for Dr. Ford refuses to release her medical records even though they say that they want everything involving this case to be examined.

Everything EXCEPT that. That is because if she recovered her memory after being hypnotized then that evidence will be deemed unreliable!

 

[rocketman]

I have never heard anyone dismiss the men who waited 30 and more years to report the abuse they suffered at the hands of Catholic priests. No one suggests that their wait to make a public accusation is "telling" or that their stories are scripted or somehow connected to vile or disingenuous goals of others.

There is a big difference here, these allegations were reported, are corroborated, and the ongoing investigation has proved a coordinated effort by the Catholic church to cover up it's crimes for decades. We are believing what these victims are saying because they have proof & the further they dig the worse it gets. This isn't one woman's accusation based on absolutely no evidence but, a "because I said so" claim of assault....Big Difference.

 

[ok doser]

...the reality is that most victims of sexual assault don't report it.

then they lose the opportunity to seek redress

 

[MrDante]

Have you ever heard anyone make an accusation against someone and that accusation was denied by all the people who were supposed to be there?

only three people were there in that room. Two of them have very good motives for denial.

As for the upshot of your question. You just described the vast majority of sexual assaults. Pretty much all the time it is just the claims of the alleged perpetrator and the alleged victim.

Which brings me back to my point. I have never heard anyone dismiss the men who waited 30 and more years to report the abuse they suffered at the hands of Catholic priests or denounce them as liars .

 

[MrDante]

There is a big difference here, these allegations were reported, are corroborated, and the ongoing investigation has proved a coordinated effort by the Catholic church to cover up it's crimes for decades. We are believing what these victims are saying because they have proof

what proof?

& the further they dig the worse it gets. This isn't one woman's accusation based on absolutely no evidence but, a "because I said so" claim of assault....Big Difference.

other than the decades old accusations what else is there but a "because I said so" claim of assault"?


the BIG DIFFERENCE is that one claim was investigated and the other has not been.

 

[ok doser]

... I have never heard anyone dismiss the men who waited 30 and more years to report the abuse they suffered at the hands of Catholic priests or denounce them as liars .

were they adults when the abuse occurred?

is there now a (relatively) newly recognized pattern of abuse at the hands of catholic priests?

 

[rocketman]

what proof?
other than the decades old accusations what else is there but a "because I said so" claim of assault"?

You are wrong Dante, yes they were decades old but, there was lots of corroboration which kicked off an investigation & a grand jury. It is still ongoing but, the proof is in the church's own documentation to cover up the crimes by reassignment of priests, payment of hush money to spare the church but, yes there is proof. Here is an excerpt from a NY Times article (as crappy of a source as they are).

The Pennsylvania grand jury met for two years, reviewed 500,000 documents from dioceses’ secret archives, and heard testimony from dozens of victims and the bishop of Erie. The report covers the dioceses of Allentown, Erie, Greensburg, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and Scranton. Two of the dioceses — Greensburg and Harrisburg — tried to quash the grand jury investigation last year, but later backed off that stance. The report lists each of the accused priests and documents how they were sent from parish to parish, and even sometimes out of state. The grand jury said that while the list is long, “we don’t think we got them all.” The report added, “We feel certain that many victims never came forward, and that the dioceses did not create written records every single time they heard something about abuse.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/us/catholic-church-sex-abuse-pennsylvania.html

the BIG DIFFERENCE is that one claim was investigated and the other has not been.

What's to investigate? not one source cited can confirm Dr Ford's accusation not even the friend that was supposedly with her. The libs are getting their gratis relook at this case but, without any evidence or even a witness it is just a sad story devoid of facts to support it.

 

[ok doser]

i'm curious as to what dante thinks should (or could) be investigated

specifically

did ford keep a diary?

did kavanaugh?