I’m afraid we are back to another round and round discussion so I’ll just say a few things and then we’ll have to no doubt agree to disagree because you keep either refusing to hear or refusing to engage with what I’m repeatedly saying.

I’ve already cited you a link with about 15 specific things that he lied about under oath in that hearing alone, with another 14 or so that are from his confirmation hearing to his prior position. Since you apparently won’t read them, here’s an excerpt from another article:

He claimed that certain terms in his high school yearbook — like “boof” and “devil’s triangle” — did not mean what anyone who was either a teenager in the 1980s or has access to Google knows they mean. He also said a reference he and several of his male friends made to being alumni of a woman from a nearby all-girls school was intended to “show affection,” something that the now-adult woman described as “horrible, hurtful and simply untrue.”

He claimed he got into Yale with no connections, though his grandfather went to the university as an undergraduate. He testified that he never attended a party like the one where Ford claims the assault happened — she said it was small, just a handful of people drinking at a house — but on the 1982 calendar Kavanaugh gave the committee as evidence, there’s an entry that describes a beer-drinking appointment with a small group of friends at someone’s house.

Kavanaugh also went to great lengths to downplay his drinking in high school and college — relevant because Ford and other accusers claim Kavanaugh was drunk when he sexually assaulted them — saying that his good grades are evidence that rampant boozing couldn’t have been possible.

“Anyway, it’s preposterous that people are suggesting Kavanaugh may have perjured himself. Perjury, in this case, is a liberal construct, and it doesn’t apply to a man like Kavanaugh telling small lies in the furtherance of his career.” This was said ironically, but does seem to be a prevelent perspective. Perhaps it’s also yours, I don’t know. There are no small lies under oath. They all count as perjury, but a lot of those “small” lies were directly relevant to her accusations. If they weren’t, he wouldn’t have bothered to lie about them.

And for the last time, her ability to remember certain things clearly and others not clearly was textbook for someone who had suffered that kind of trauma. I’ve already said that about 5 times already, but apparently neuroscience doesn’t count for much in the face of your biases.

“A door opens and a police officer is suddenly staring at the wrong end of a gun. In a split second, his brain is hyper-focused on that gun. It is very likely that he will not recall any of the details that were irrelevant to his immediate survival: Did the shooter have a moustache? What color was the shooter’s hair? What was the shooter wearing?

The officer’s reaction is not a result of poor training. It’s his brain reacting to a life-threatening situation just the way it is supposed to — just the way the brain of a rape victim reacts to an assault. (emphasis mine) In the aftermath, the officer may be unable to recall many important details. He may be uncertain about many. He may be confused about many. He may recall some details inaccurately. Simultaneously, he will recall certain details — the things his brain focused on — with extraordinary accuracy. He may well never forget them. All of this, too, is the human brain working the way it was designed to work.”

And none of any of this addresses what old, white, Republican former Justice John Paul Stevens said about Kavanaugh’s unsuitability based on his temperment and extreme level of partisanship, which I agree with. You are the one who is full-on enmeshed in your emotions, and preconceived biases around this case, which apparently make it impossible for you to interface with (or even see) data, logic and or anything that isn’t what you’ve already decided for your own reasons.

Edit: You also cannot seem to wrap your head around the idea that no-one had to prove any crime in order for him to not be a suitable candidate for this position, no matter how many times that too gets stated. It really is the most remarkable case of cognitive dissonance I think I’ve ever seen.

Take care, I’m done banging my head against this particular brick wall.

Written by

Dispelling cultural myths with research-driven stories. My favorite word is “specious.” Not fragile like a flower; fragile like a bomb! Twitter @ElleBeau

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store