The Video of the Senate Hearing Re Ford Versus Kavanaugh

I had a very difficult time finding the actual video of the full hearing. There are loads of ‘summaries’ on the net, but no direct links to the actual hearing. Anyway, I found it eventually.

It is not surprising that there are no direct links immediately available since the video of the whole hearing lasts nine hours! Here it is:


I have not watched it all yet, but is is possible to cut the nine hours down significantly by skipping the ‘coffee breaks’ and such, and the associated waffling by commentators. I am currently about four hours into the hearing after a couple of hours of selective watching, but not missing any of the actually testimony.

So far, only Ford’s testimony is being heard. Kavanaugh has not yet appeared. We may all know about Ford’s excuse for not wanting to appear at the Senate hearing on account of her fear of flying, even though she constantly flies here and there, both for leisure and business. Her reason for saying that she fears flying, she said, was that she wanted the Senate investigators to come to her rather than her go to them.

The system that the committee operates is that each Senator can talk to the witness for five minutes and ask questions. The Republican side appointed a ‘spokesperson’ to ask questions on their behalf. It is all very weird from our point of view in the UK. That person was called a ‘Prosecutor’. She delved into the detail of the accusations. It was from her questioning that the ‘fear of flying’ emerged.

Democrat and Republican Senators took turns to have their five minutes. The Dems spoke personally, but the Reps allowed the ‘Prosecutor’ to take their turns.

The weird thing was that the Dems did not ask questions. They spent about three of their five minutes praising Ford for her ‘public spiritedness’ for coming forward, and how she inspired the citizens. The last two minutes were spent demanding an FBI investigation.

One of the things that I found weird is that Ford apparently demanded an FBI Investigation. Why would an ‘ordinary’ person make such a demand? Most people would ask for a police investigation on the grounds that they had been assaulted. Why did she demand an FBI investigation?

Again and again, Dem Senators used their five minutes to demand an FBI investigation. One Dem accused the Reps of saying nothing, even though the Reps had appointed a ‘spokesperson’ to speak for them in turn. One Dem actually said, “I BELIEVE YOU!”

From what I have seen so far, the whole process is a comedy. But there is one or two things especially that have not been explained. After the ‘sexual assault’, Ford left the house abruptly. Why did she leave her friend behind? She was somehow driven home in a car (?) after walking out of the house. Who drove her home and how did that person know where she was?

But her interrogation is not yet over. Perhaps those two simple matters will be exposed later. If previous answers to questions are anything to go by, she will simply say that she does not remember.

It is interesting to listen to and watch Dem Senators milking this hearing for political purposes. It is so OBVIOUS!

But there is a more general point. The Internet is available to every person on the Planet. Any person of the billions can accuse some other person of anything. There is nothing wrong with that. What is important is that those accusations must be recognised as such – mere accusations. Most of them do not deserve a response.

The internet is a ‘conversation’. Even the NHS sites are no more than ‘talking’.

But we must beware of the corruption of real science, and real scientists must start to shout loud and clear that they oppose pseudo science. Epidemiology proves NOTHING.

I am vaguely looking forward to watching the rest of the video tomorrow. It will be interesting to see how Kavanaugh comports himself.


12 Responses to “The Video of the Senate Hearing Re Ford Versus Kavanaugh”

  1. elenamitchell Says:

    She reported it to a newspaper anonymously and then it was leaked anonymously. That is enough to tell me that there was a deliberate attempt to discredit Kavanaugh for political purposes.

  2. Rose Says:

    I watched the whole thing as it was happening and was very glad of those coffee breaks, so I will keep quiet until you’ve finished.

  3. J Brown Says:

    Thanks to citizen journalism, there are quite a number of facts that have come out about Christine Ford, as well as observations about her ‘performance’ at the hearing. First, she is a university professor in psychology. I cannot believe that she stands in front of a lecture hall with the tiny, little girl voice, looking and acting so ‘fragile’. This was part of the theatrics she was meant to portray. Second, it is interesting that her attorney, Katz, was given to her by the Democrats, and that Ford is NOT PAYING any attorney fees. The Dems were grandstanding during the entire time. This entire issue is meant to delay the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice until after the midterm elections on Nov 7, where the Democrats hope to regain a majority in the Senate, and thus be able to reject any candidate that Trump puts forth. In the process, they have victimized both Ford and Kavanaugh for political ends. It’s truly disgusting. Hopefully you will get to the moment when Lindsey Graham puts forward his ‘question’. He succinctly puts it: If you felt you could come here and get a fair process, you have come to the wrong town at the wrong time.
    I am an American citizen – a registered Democrat for 40+ years. I vote by absentee ballot. For the first time in my life, I voted Republican across the board. And I believe that anyone watching this hearing, who is not thoroughly brainwashed by the ‘I hate Trump’ faction of politics, can only feel the same. The shenanigans of the Democrats will, hopefully, force their demise. #walkaway

  4. elenamitchell Says:

    Well said, J Brown. This is exactly what it looks like.

  5. Timothy Goodacre Says:

    I agree totally with J Brown.

  6. junican Says:

    Haven’t had time to watch any more today.
    To me, it seems that all there actually is is an accusation. How would the police react to such an accusation, where the accuser walked into a police station off the street and claimed that X took a revealing picture of her at a party 30 years ago. She cannot remember where the party was or when or who was there, although she seemed to remember one or two people.
    What would the police do? I suspect that they would want a copy of the revealing picture. No picture, no evidence. So she says that she thinks that X might still have a copy, and can the police raid his house and search it. Oh, and can they get his appointment to be a judge postponed for a while whilst they search his house, his car, his holiday home, his relatives houses and those of his friends. “How can someone who took a revealing picture of me 30 years ago when I was only 15 be a fit person to be a judge?”, she weeps.

    Oh wait. He is already a judge. He has been practising law in various positions for all of 25 years. He is now going to be a Supreme Judge. Why did she not complain when he first became a judge?

    • Rose Says:

      Keep going, you can’t draw a proper conclusion from the prosecution until you’ve heard the defence.

  7. garyk30 Says:

    Watched the whole darn thing and heard not one shred of evidence that her accusations were the truth and the assault actually happened.

    I thought our culture was to logical for ‘witchhunts’; but, I was mistaken.

    • elenamitchell Says:

      America seems to have caught the Historic Sex Abuse Bug from Britain. They must have thought they were missing out, especially since it’s usually the other way around.

  8. junican Says:

    No time again today – hospital appointment.

    Trust nobody.

    • garyk30 Says:

      Best wishes with that appt.

      • junican Says:

        Thanks. No problems with the prostate itself apparently, apart from enlargement. Further tests to follow. Got some pills off doc to help urination.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: