Believe her or not

When you try to equate the "facts" surrounding Thomas and Kavanaugh with the actual facts involving Clinton and Biden, you've missed the point, whatever point you're trying to make.

I find this article a simplistic, misleading, strawman. Of COURSE the parties are going to support their candidates. That's what politics is all about. Doing a historical walk through the dust ups over sexual accusations establishes nothing. Emery proposes all incidences are cut of the same cloth but, beyond the fact that they involved politics, that is simply NOT true. The reality of such accusations is that like all legal accusations, there should be assumed innocence and conviction requires convincing evidence. In most such situations, political or not, evidence is difficult to nail down. In Thomas' case, Hill's complaints came out of the blue after she had maintained a personal relationship with Thomas well after the alleged incidents occurred. There was no evidence, no other accusers, and no behavioral clues that such accusations might be true. The incidents were old and Hill told no one about them. The nature of the alleged issue was unwanted sexual talk in the workplace. In BJ Clintoon's case, there were multiple credible accusers of not only sexual contact but abuse. The incident with Lewinski was proven to be FACT. Further, BJ lied under oath about his actions with Lewinski. His guilt was proven and significant enough that he lost his law license and paid a big settlement. Trump is dismissed as a lecher but most of Trump's involvement with women was dating as a highly eligible bachelor. In his various activities Trump met and interacted with many beautiful women. In all those interactions, we have no credible accusations and certainly no proof. Trump deals with many women in business and every indication is that he treats them fairly and well. We have ONE crude private comment that was NOT about a actual incident but a general brag. As to Kavanaugh, he is perogatialy dismissed as a "jock" and "beer drinker". The "victim" offered less than Hill. There was no proof Kavanaugh and Ford ever met, ever went to the alleged party, or went into a room together. Like Hill, there was no evidence, no other accusers, and no behavioral clues that such accusations might be true. Witnesses Ford mentioned ALL denied it ever happened. The incidents were old and Ford told no one about them. Further, Ford was a strong liberal partisan. Ford also lied several times like about her fear of flying. Reade worked with Biden. Reade told people about the incident and they support her story although she was vague on details. The incident was old and nothing was done about it at the time. Behaviorally, Biden has a bad presence around women with undesired closeness, touching, and sniffing. "Believing women" isn't a matter of political convenience. It's a matter of a credible story and evidence. Kavanaugh's accuser was a cruel joke. Thomas' and Biden's accusers at least knew them. Thomas, at worst, SAID unwanted things. Biden, at worst, COMMITTED sexual assault. Thomas' behavior is good. Biden''s behavior is creepy. Both women should be HEARD but the delay until a critical, very public moment is suspicious. There is no evidence and no case. Trump has no credible accusers at all. He made a poor statement about a general situation. BJ Clintoon is a PROVEN sexual preditor. Women accusing him should definitely be believed. This is all far more than the politics.

The Republicans or nominees (who were ) accused were innocent. And the Democrats accused were guilty as sin. If that fact is not highlighted the article is useless and misleading. Sort of 'both parties do it' defense.

This article is trying to compare apples and oranges and it just isn't working on a number of levels. Presidential nominations by republicans at best are defended better by us out here, than they are in congress. That is pretty sad. You can tell when the attacks are fake, because the women all suddenly disappear into the tall grass after the goal is achieved and the damage is done. Like Roy Moore and Herman Cain accusers. I have never seen women vanish so fast in my life.

Anita Hill's problem was that she wanted to date Clarence Thomas, and like many black women, she was very angry he married a white woman. I seriously doubt Thomas did or said anything of a sexual nature, since it was proven that most of her complaints came from a low rent porn movie of the day. She was the tool of Biden, Howard Metzenbaum and she was in a relationship with Metzenbaum's own chief of staff. Women who are offended by certain behaviors do not follow that man from department to department. They just do not. Plus there is also the fact on the record that Thomas had at least 10 women standing up for him as character witnesses, and Hill had literally ZERO. Thomas's staffers defended him without hesitation, and they destroyed Anita Hill. I watched those hearings, and they were my first experience with how awful the democrat party was, and the party has not changed, except to get levels worse.

I found it of interest that Blasey-Ford's family did not show up at the hearing to support her. they knew her too well to believe her.