Gearing up to punish the slut
Republicans are preparing the buckets of mud.
Judiciary Committee Republicans sent out a memo criticizing “Democrats’ tactics and motives” and calling on Feinstein to release “the letter she received back in July so that everyone can know what she’s known for weeks.” And four people close to the White House said they expected Republicans to question the accuser’s vague memories and why Feinstein, up for reelection in November with the Democratic base hungry for anti-Trump fodder, sat on the accusation for months.
They’re going to attack Feinstein for not acting on the letter and attack anyone who does act on the letter. All bases covered.
Three of those people also said they expect the president to go after Kavanaugh’s accuser rather than to turn on the judge. They noted that Trump has done so before, not just denouncing his own accusers but also attacking those of others, notably, failed Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore.
A lawyer close to the White House said the nomination will not be withdrawn.
“No way, not even a hint of it,” the lawyer said. “If anything, it’s the opposite. If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried. We can all be accused of something.”
Pussygrabbers and rapists stick together.
Is this man confessing to something? Inquiring minds want to know.
Why does everyone assume that because one man – ten men – one hundred men – are bad actors that means that all men should rally to their defense on the rather lame excuse that the same thing can happen to every man? It’s an accusation that all men are doing it, and I hardly think that’s true. It’s just that way too many men are doing it.
But what they want people to think is that ordinary human behaviors are being punished, things that are just normal things that everyone does and that cannot be helped. They don’t want people to realize that these are ugly, nasty, filthy behaviors that men can help if they choose to, and that many men condemn as much as women do.
iknklast, I don’t think he’s claiming that all men have pasts they should be worried about so much as he’s pretending that innocent men are vulnerable to false accusations by women wanting to wreck their careers, and every time a man like Kavanaugh is ‘brought down’ by lying liars, it encourages more women to do the same.
In essence, he’s telling men that even if their pats are squeaky clean, all a woman has to do is make shit up, so we should stop believing women or we might be next.
I’d say that’s the safest bet in the world.
Of course he’s going to go after her. (And who thought for even a second that Trump would turn on Kavanaugh over this?)
AoS, I do realize that, but I think it is also safe to say there is an element of “boys will be boys” in his defense of Kavanaugh, and the idea that all men do something to be ashamed of when they’re boys. Which is probably true, but not all of them assault women or break laws, and no one is suggesting that minor peccadillos should be raised to the level of adult consequences. The “false accusations” claim is certainly there – it’s always there when a woman suggests a man has abused her – but the other aspect is also present, the idea that “we all have something we don’t want ruining our careers”. I’m sure he wants men to think this will include such things as “pulled a girl’s pigtails in third grade” or “whistled at a woman on the street when he was 16” or other minor things like that. These are not necessarily false accusations, but ones that are trivial, and I think that aspect is also in the defense he puts up.
Oh, I’ve no doubt you’re right, iknklast; he seems to be covering all the bases and blowing every whistle he can think of in that one short sentence.
Regarding ‘boys will be boys’, I certainly had my share of boys’ nights out (back before colour was invented, according to my kids when they see photo’s of ‘the olden days’) but I can say with certainty that not one of them ended with anybody being assaulted or harassed. My group of friends knew how to misbehave properly, and I don’t think we were particularly outliers in that respect.
As you hinted at in your first comment, that lawyer does seem to be protesting too much, and in doing so he’s tainting all men with his weasel words.
And then these same men get angry when women feel the need to be cautious around all unknown men.
Yes, and too many get angry at the women for being so cautious rather than at the men who make their caution a necessity.
It’s almost a parallel with the transwomen in women’s spaces issue; namely that those men unable or unwilling to accept that they are not the innocent victims of women’s wrath are themselves the cause of the problem.