Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Jason Beale Profile picture
@jabeale
Oct 6, 2018 • 6 tweets • 2 min read • Read on X
Can someone from the #WeBelieveSurvivors crowd explain to me the difference between Dr. Ford and Ms. Swetnick? Both have come forward and accused BK of inappropriate sexual predation, but Dems like Senator Gary Peters are saying that the Swetnick allegation wasn't "serious"...
...or "credible." Swetnick says she was the victim of a gang-rape, which would certainly qualify her as a survivor. She says she saw Kavanaugh at the party the night she was assaulted. Why are Dems - who are willing to believe Dr. Ford's allegation absent evidence, and who...
...have been telling us that questioning her veracity, memory, or intent is tantamount to suborning rape and harassing victims - not affording Ms. Swetnick the same support and activism? Why are they saying she and her lawyer ruined their chances with Kavanaugh and Ford?
That doesn't sound like a group of people who believe all survivors. It sounds like they don't believe Ms. Swetnick - a conclusion against which they are encouraging thousands of people to protest on the steps of SCOTUS as we speak. Is it possible that an allegation of sexual...
...assault, objectively evaluated on its evidentiary merits and demerits, can possibly be NOT automatically believed? Because if that's possible - and it seems to be the case with Dems and Ms. Swetnick - then what's this protest about? These people holding the...
...#WeBelieveSurvivors signs should be including Shumer and Pelosi's on their list of targets who apparently don't. Or, is it possible that this is simply another case of selective outrage, emotional manipulation, and partisan grandstanding? Hard to know who to believe, isn't it?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Jason Beale

Jason Beale Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jabeale

Jason Beale Profile picture
Oct 8, 2018
The same people who castigate their fellow media for giving Trump a billion bucks in "free media" during the campaign - and who tell us Putin swayed the election with 100K in Facebook ads - don't understand why the rest of us see their across-the-board activism as a...
...24/7 advertising campaign for the Democratic party, and Leftist policies, organizations, and culture in general. The most heinous aspect of this 24/7 advocacy for liberals and liberalism is that they will never admit it - everybody knows that a political ad is the paid...
...manifestation of a political agenda. There's no subterfuge. But when reporters, "news" anchors and commentators all profess their ideological indifference and objectivity while actively advocating the liberal perspective of current events, they're providing one party with...
Read 19 tweets
Jason Beale Profile picture
Oct 4, 2018
The journalistic malpractice in this article was so egregious it made me go back to their original Ramirez article to read it more closely. Two issues jump out - First, Farrow and Meyer were given the names of two eyewitnesses, whose identities they chose to keep confidential.
What happened to those two witnesses? They had their names. Certainly they were contacted - nothing better for a follow-up story than an on-the-record account of an eyewitness, right? Yet in their follow-up shitshow of a story today, Farrow and Meyer don't mention these two...
..."onlookers." Nothing. Not, "We couldn't contact", not "They wouldn't speak on the record", not "They corroborated/denied..." Nothing. That tells me that those "onlookers" didn't do much to advance the story. Either way, someone should ask Ronan.
Read 8 tweets
Jason Beale Profile picture
Oct 4, 2018
Please read every word of this article. If you need any more evidence that the assault on Kavanaugh's character has turned journalists into advocates with no interest in the basic standards of source credibility, it's here.
They interviewed a guy named Kenneth Appold. He said he was 100 percent certain that the story about Ramirez was true. He said he was certain because he'd been told the story by an eyewitness. He said he hesitated to come forward until he could contact that eyewitness.
He said he couldn't reach the eyewitness, but decided to come forward anyway. Farrow and Meyers reached the eyewitness, who had no memory of the alleged assault. They then quoted Appold's affirmation of the alleged incident for a number of paragraphs - despite the fact that...
Read 6 tweets
Jason Beale Profile picture
Oct 2, 2018
Here are a few of the issues that jump out from this interview with Swetnick.

- First, she says she remembered Brett Kavanaugh was at those parties after 36 years because he "has a very distinctive face." He doesn't have anywhere near a "very distinctive face." By any stretch.
- Next, she said she believes he was wearing a Georgetown Prep uniform. At a gang rape party. In the summer.

- She said the reason she came forward was “I thought that I might have some information that might corroborate some of the things that she had stated.”
"Might have"? "Might corroborate"? "Some of the things"? This from the alleged victim of a violent gang-rape that she can't be certain didn't include Kavanaugh. "Might"?

- She uses some familiar terminology when describing behavior she says she witnessed from Kavanaugh:
Read 14 tweets
Jason Beale Profile picture
Oct 2, 2018
Many of you are aware of my background as an interrogator for about 3 decades. Just watched this video of the @tvkatesnow interview with Julie Swetnick. There is no doubt in my mind, whatsoever, that Ms. Swetnick's story is complete, utter horseshit.
I'm not saying she's 'mistaken' or that something may have happened to her but it didn't involve Brett Kavanaugh. I'm saying that just about every word out of her mouth in this interview is contrived. She's lying. (And I would wager that Kate Snow had the same reaction.)
And I don't mean to suggest that it takes a career in interrogation to recognize Ms. Swetnick's lies and dissembling - I was just trying to express the depth of my certitude that Ms. Swetnick is a liar, and a really, really bad liar at that.
Read 4 tweets
Jason Beale Profile picture
Sep 29, 2018
Note to media and political analysts/pundits: If you are going to give us your hot take on why Kavanaugh was indifferent to another FBI investigation without noting that his perspective is that of a man adamant of his innocence, you're not doing your job.
Is it too much too ask for a short aside - maybe a line or two - informing the reader/watcher/listener that it's not particularly surprising that an innocent man facing 3 false accusations wouldn't be interested in another week of delay? Or are you going to keep rhetorically...
...asking "Why would Kavanaugh not want the FBI to investigate, if only to clear his name? What is he afraid of? What is he hiding? Does he think the FBI will come up with something?" Think about it. Would an innocent man besieged by false accusations really welcome/request a...
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(