Monday, October 1, 2018
Emma Burkey- Text messages suggest Kavanaugh wanted to refute accuser's claim before it became public
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/mutual-friend-ramirez-kavanaugh-anxious-come-forward-evidence-n915566
This article discusses the text messages that have been tried to be sent so the FBI could investigate them by two former classmates of Kavanaugh and one of his accusers, Deborah Ramirez, at Yale. According to the article from NBC, Kerry Berchem has been trying to bring the texts to the FBI's attention because they discuss how Kavanaugh tried to personally contact other classmates to serve as witnesses against the possible allegations with Ramirez. Kavanaugh did this before he was even accused, which tells a lot. Berchem is confident that the texts will come to the FBI's attention and after this article it would be difficult for them not to. The article also discusses how when in the same wedding party in 1997 as Kavanaugh, Ramirez avoided him the entire night, showing her obvious discomfort about what happened.
This article is another piece in the biggest story of our nation right now. It is crucial for U.S. citizens to keep up with this ongoing story because not only does it say something about our government, it is all about someone who could be in the high court! The most important part of this article, in my opinion, is the fact that Kavanaugh contacted classmates to ask them to defend him if Ramirez's claims ever came up. That says everything I need to know. He hadn't even been accused and he contacted them! Why would he be worried about being defended if he was innocent? Easy, he wouldn't be. Yes, it must be considered that these texts haven't been investigated yet, however this story is something worth following because it reveals more information about the third, (yes, third), accuser of Kavanaugh and how she couldn't stand being near him at that wedding. The overall Kavanaugh hearings and accusations bring back up the still very current MeToo movement that began with actresses in Hollywood; and just like how those who were accused lost their awards and fame, Kavanaugh, at the very least, should lose his Supreme Court nomination. The clear connection to a past historical event can be with the Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas hearings in the early 1990's. Hill was making sexual harassment allegations towards the nominated Thomas for the Supreme Court . She was disregarded and Thomas is currently still in the court. I hope the Senate does not disregard the women's view and learns from their past mistakes. Listen to the polygraph tests, not the 1982 calendars.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm afraid you have misinterpreted the events and therefore come to an unjustified conclusion. I sort of skimmed over the article and I'm not about to do a lot of research so I'll just assume most of the statements you cited from NBC are true. In this case, you imply that the fact (unchecked, but of course possibly true) that Mr. Kavanaugh asked for defense before the accusation is evidence that he comitted the crime. See, did this before it went public - it is not stated in the NBC article that there was no allegation prior to the publishing of it in the New Yorker. In other words, Ramirez could have announced something like this on a smaller scale beforehand.
ReplyDeleteAnita Hill was not disregarded; a hearing was in fact held for her. She presented no evidence for her case and it was therefore assumed that Clarence Thomas was innocent.
I don't see why a presumably innocent Kavanaugh should lose his nomination. Polygraph tests are notoriously innacurate, and by the way, Kavanaugh took one too, and was pronounced truthful by the machine. anyway. At least 1982 calendars offer some corroborative evidence, unlike Dr. Ford.
Emma Burkey: Try reading the article and doing research next time.
ReplyDelete