power imbalance. kavanaugh has the white house. he has those in charge of the committee all behind him. democrats are desperate to stop that, and some argue ford has been stained by her indirect connection to their efforts, which did cause a delay. and for all the talk of sympathy and empathy, before a word of testimony has been heard, with each passing day more and more partisans are doing what they do worst. they re twisting the situation to suit their purpose. just a few hours ago at the white house we heard their communications director saying that they are still 100% behind judge kavanaugh. what happened to she should be heard, he should be heard, there should be a process? 100%? how can they be 100% unless they ve done something to discover the truth or falsity of these allegations? if not, how can they be certain? all these questions seem to
michael cohen you ve got two people who were very close to the president for a lot of talk time and manafort was of course at that infamous trump tower meeting. and just yesterday michael flynn, a federal judge set a sentencing date for trump s former national security advisor. people take that as a signal he is finished being of use to mueller. now, we don t know what information all these people are sharing with the special counsel. but clearly mueller is either closing in on trump or getting ready to close down the probe or both. we know cohen and others are being asked what the president knew and what he said and did. could that lead to proof of crimes? look, my take is it s very hard to say yes. i know many on tv are architecting the president s demise on different crimes. i ve just never seen the proof to protect such speculation. could it show wrongdoing of a
like the one against judge kavanaugh outside the criminal context? in what we call the court of public opinion we can t take comfort in accepted hurdles and protections of beyond a reasonable doubt, due process, the presumption of innocence. they don t apply here, in part because we can t test, we can t develop evidence, we can t put it to just one body to decide like a jury does. it s tricky enough when this plays out in the media. too many allegations have been skiefld because stifled because of sexism and cultural bias over the years. me too as a movement legitimized accusation ppz but we know all accusations aren t legitimate. so simply coming forward can t be dispositive, as difficult as it may be. now, on top of those difficulties we see in this current controversy playing out in the worst place for, it a toxic arena of competing agendas. ford stands in the way of the gop getting a generation of jurisprudence to go their way. she comes into this with a huge
that she wanted to come forth and testify. and do what she had to do to get her there s no question about that. you can t take anything away from it. so remember, she s been rushed and what she s been thinking about this for a long time it sounds like. this is what she didn t tell anybody for 30 years, she has been theiring about this for a long time, judge kavanaugh had less than 24 hours from the time he learned her name they are completely different situations. if you believe that she believes it let s not say it s true. if you believe that she believes this, that she is in good faith in believing that this was done to her, they are completely on uneven ground. you know very well no, that s not true, and i ll tell you why. someone who knows the psychology of this, it is very hard for women to come forward. but he it is not unusual for them to have memory gaps about certain details of an event. sure, but how is that going to change between no
there. what is the difference? excuse what do you mean what s the difference? what s the difference? judge kavanaugh found out the identity of the individual on sunday for the first time. by monday he had already given his statement to the committee. right. and so he has subjected himself again as he did over 30 hours of oral testimony in front of the whole world to see to the same committee as he did in response to 1300 written questions. to six fbi vets, including one completed six months ago. he has submitted himself under penalty of perjury or under penalty for lying to congress. all of this under oath. right. and so he is willing. he was willing this last monday just less than 24 hours after hearing the woman s name for the first time, he was willing to testify and clear his name and say under oath what he has said otherwise, which is