...It is all about perception. When the accuser has every opportunity to come forward, efforts made to provide a convenient means to put her statement to public record, and she even refuses to do that privately in her own home? Perception and opportunity soon gives way to suspicion and credibility.
The accuser set a precondition that the FBI investigate her claims prior to her testifying.
The vastly more powerful Republican-controlled Senate denied her that righteous response and played chicken with her.
She now faces perpetual silencing and being ignored unless she caves-in to that refusal and consolation-prize alternative.
She is now assessing the impact of that caving-in and whether the hell that the Right will put her through is worth the effort.
If she needs an extra day or two to make sense out of that before giving her answer, then, what the hell, give her some space.
But you're right about the "perception" thing.
And, if American women "perceive" that Blasey-Ford was railroaded, they'll hurt you badly at the polls in November.
I don’t believe I came across so much
unsubstantiated claims in a response than this. . Let me just involve some hard facts you obviously would rather hope to ignore.
First is the fact Senator Feinstein had this information concerning Mrs Blasley-Ford well before the vetting process on judge Kavanaugh began. She chose not to share his information with Republicans, as well as made a decision not to ask the judge to see what he knew concerning the events. Senator Feinstein had one side of the alleged (very important term) events, and decided it was best not to seek the truth out from HIS side and what he remembers. Instead the concerns were over all the provided documents, behind his court record as a judge. It was just too many to red them all.
Second fact. Senator Feinstein was more interested in seeing how the proceedings were to play out with
votes Let’s be honest, if the votes were more difficult to obtain, would Feinstein have waited to bring these accusations when Kavanaugh couldn’t defend them during a vetting process? If he couldn’t be confirmed, would Diane Feinstein bring these accusations up at all? Are accusations of misconduct not important enough for a senator to bring up during the vetting process? She had Mrs Blasey-Ford’s letter of accusation, her side of the events ... not his. Paperwork and past judicial rulings THAT much more important to democrats than a possible history of sexual assault?
Wow! The liberal democrats really think highly of women, don’t they? Nice to know what’s REALLY important to Democrats with regard to women.
Fact three. With regard to keeping these accusations “private”. Again, Feinstein and the democrats knew before the vetting process began about the sexual assault. If this was to be Mrs Blasey-Ford’s desire to handle this out of the public arena, why did Democrats leak this to the press when it looked like judge Kavanaugh might have the votes to be confirmed? Obviously Republicans had no knowledge, but Mrs Feinstein did. So all this “sympathy cry” to not crucify her publicly and make it political is just BS. Democrats USED her like a political pawn. Let’s see you try your best to argue against that point with facts.
The democrats are USING these accusations and the accuser like a political pawn on, and see her as nothing more than a chess piece. There is your “respect for women”.
This is what’s called, breaking down the timeline of facts, who knew the accusations, when they came out with it, HOW tye claims of assault were released, and tying it all together using rational thought and basic common sense. That’s how you produce a well thought out response to this particular case.
