The Republicans: We believe Ford, but she was wrong. HUH?

[shockey80]

They are fucking liars. They said Ford was attacked by someone else. It wasn't Kavanaugh. What about Mark Judge? Was she mistaken about him also? I have not heard one reporter ask that question. Why would she make up Mark Judge being in the room? The lack of critical thinking in this country is off the charts.

[femmedem]

1. The new talking point I saw on social media is that she suffers from false memory syndrome.

They are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to come up with a way to sound sympathetic to her without saying they shrug off attempted rape.

[Iliyah]

2. Too late,

they called her a liar, claimed it never happened.


She is 100% it was him, enough said.

[Funtatlaguy]

6. Their company line now is that, yes, she was attacked, just not by Kav.

[Fred Sanders]

7. They turned a two witness, no other evidence allowed hearing into a criminal trial!

One with little investigation and no defence witnesses allowed...so of course the "stsndard" was not met!

Now they accuse us of not liking the rule of law. And the media is letting them get away with this mother of all Lies.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

3. Which is a load of patronizing bullshit

[Guilded Lilly]

4. They follow the proven path of their craven leader. Blame anyone and anything except yourself.

[Funtatlaguy]

5. If only, she had kept a diary or journal. And, after the initial shock from the trauma

Had somewhat subsided From the assault...maybe a few days or even weeks later......She had written it down with as many details as possible.
How awesome that would have been to put up against Kavs stupid ass calendar. Sigh.

[Liberty Belle]

8. This is why we needed Avenatti's client to testify and talk to media. She confirmed

that Kavenaugh was involved in exactly the type of group rape scenario that Ford described.

It's easy to rationalize away one victim, for some (though I believed her) but Avenatti's client was the most damning story in my view, and her high level security clearance meant she could lose her job if she lied under oath, yet she begged to testify and was refused.

She has said she spoke with police at the time. The police said it would take a month to get the files. Why weren't there demands to wait until those records were retrieved from storage?

Why isn't that all over the media? Most Republican women I've talked to never heard of her, and are shocked when I tell them about her story. This has been suppressed even by mainstream media outlets and certainly by the right-wing "news" stations.

[anarch]

9. all I'm hearing is a bunch of "there's no evidence; the FBI couldn't find anything" etc.

as if they actually could give a shit; as if they wouldn't just turn a blind eye like they have for all of the orange buffoon's trespasses.

Sadly the few comments along those lines that I've seen have been from women (I generally tend to avoid social media, so it's a very small sample size, and further filtered through facebook's privacy settings, so basically limited to relatives of friends)--the common factor for all of them seems to be that they are strongly "Christian," so they must be being told what to think by their presumably all male church elders or whatever.

But it's all "what more do you people want, he's been exonerated by the FBI investigation...there's nothing there! It's just an unruly leftist mob causing trouble!" Kinda like fuckface talking about the Russian's stealing the election--"well I asked Putin about it and he said they didn't do it; he denied it very strongly, so it must be true."

So, brainwashing mostly.