No one ever tried to two-boy rape me at a beer-drinking party because I'm allergic to frat boys and am careful to stay away from them. But I do know that the alcohol in beer is just as effective as the alcohol in Grey Goose vodka, Thunderbird, Twisted Tea or grain alcohol from a pharmacy. You just have to drink more of it. Kavanaugh confuses beer with KoolAide.
I kept wondering how often after these episodes of "pulling a train" or "boofing" the necessity of abortion came up. I guess not with boofing. But even if the booze goes in backwards, the DNA markers remain. (Movie stars boof with coffee, they say, and other age-defeating substances.) But these boys didn't really know what they were doing -- they were paying off those women with violence because women spoil everything. They think they're so smart. Bring them down a few notches.
In this hearing more unprosecuted felonies went whizzing by in Kavanaugh's testimony (including underage drinking) than on an Indian reservation. The FBI is not usually involved there either. Rape or attempted rape have no statute of limitations in Maryland where they were. Since the hearing was run like a criminal trial, by now everyone has practiced testifying, knows what's at stake, and is ready to initiate proceedings. All they need is a Democratic judge and Kavanaugh will find that hizzy fits are not a good defense.
But this was about "normal" American sins: drinking and oversexualization of status and power. Rites of passage, if you will. It got the younger women all revved up and enraged, but I'm older and tougher than them. For this kind of stuff we rural folks just go break out the windows on a guy's pickup. This was so much like a well-written TV show that international happenings were ignored and we forgot about the major crimes for a while.
The hearing was all window-dressing for the REAL crime, which -- it is suggested -- is Mafia controlled, including Trump. Even Putin, though that's going a little too far. No one controls Putin do they? Any more than anyone controls Avenati? I mean, these relentless guys with heads like soccer balls have (ahem) LOTS of balls.
Aren't these people speaking under oath? It's my understanding that though it's not a criminal trial, lying to senators at a formal hearing is illegal in some way. Of course, Kavanaugh has done it before and nothing happened.
Hardly anyone goes before the Supreme Court for rape or drunkenness, much less being a smart-ass frat boy for life. So a final hearing would be more interested in the money. Where did those major money payments come from? How did the gambling debts work? (Now that's more like traditional Mafia territory.) Shady stuff abounds, they say, and still more would show up at an FBI investigation, which explains the question of why no one wants to have one except for the people who want Kavanaugh to go down so they don't have to explain how he has managed to get this far. Patronage trails are always interesting.
In spite of extravagant rhetorical flourishes, Dr. Ford's life is said to have been laid bare, but that was hardly true. Other exciting and embarrassing things must have happened besides flying. Probably academic so no one present would understand. As Stephen Colbert said, "They were all in her hippopotamus." Evidently she has kept her head down and done her work, which was very nice since she got lots of island vacations and didn't have to go to Australia, though it was an Australian company she worked for while living in California, part of the global economy.
Very seriously, when both the American Bar Association and the Jesuits have changed their minds about approval and point the finger at someone as unqualified, it's time to pay attention and cut through all the drama -- the tongue in the cheek and the trembling watery face. (The least he could do is bring a hanky. I notice he did that for the second part and laid it in front of him just in case..) Now the dean of the Yale Law School, Heather Gerken, has opposed Kavanaugh -- the same Yale Kavanaugh uses as evidence of his quality.
Dr. Ford had the advantage of two tough lawyers on either side of her, while Kavanaugh sat alone. Nevertheless, when Kavanaugh was clearly off the rails, out of control, and demanding whether the soft-spoken female senator say whether she drank beer, one of his handlers slipped him a sheet of yellow legal paper with something short and big written on it which he quickly covered with a tablet. Right then the Repubs called a recess and ushered him to a place he could take a chill pill. Of course, I have no way of knowing whether he did that.
Here is an alternative explanation of why Mitchell stopped questioning K. "WSJ: Mitchell advised Republicans that to continue questioning Kavanaugh "was required by her oath in Arizona to inform Kavanaugh of his rights after he lied to her about July 1, 1982 entry on his calender. Maryland statutes was last question she asked, then break was called." Evidently she could continue to question Dr. Ford without informing her of her rights because she told no lies.
I was impressed that Kavanaugh's mother sort of suggested Trump's mother in her elderly elegance. She and the father were also handled carefully by large men. These hearings are not freeform.
They say that George Bush, Kavanaugh's former employer who knows how much Kavanaugh knows, is working the phones hard to keep the FBI out of all this and to get K. on the Supreme Court. Even out of office this long, Bush is still vulnerable, no longer above the law even by Kavanaugh's reckoning. And here you thought K was Trump's boy! But can't Justices on the Supreme Court still be compelled to testify? it's not over 'till it's over. The only sure way to keep someone from being called is death.
In the years that I was an animal control officer (insert your frat boy jokes here) which was really a specialized deputy sheriff for Multnomah County (PDX), I spent a lot of time in court to back up tickets written against everything from minor offences to attempted murder with vicious dogs as weapons. A dozen of us officers and maybe half-a-dozen judges were involved with widely various results. One judge, without flinching, would order barking dogs destroyed while another judge exempted a dog that ripped a baby's scalp off on grounds that all dogs are like that.
I saw the expressions on the faces of enraged killer dogs and human beings who wished they could tear throats out. I saw those expressions again on the TV coverage of this hearing. Luckily, the most vehement were old codgers who might forget to put their teeth in. Our law system, especially at the top, is meant to be "Enljghtened" -- that is, rational, evidence-based, and universal. A very long time will pass before we return to that ideal.