Hippocampus and epinephrine

The feminist terror on the American political stage, or the incident of Judge Brett Cavanano. How the Institute of Reputation works in the USA

On Thursday, the United States took place in the USA, after a long break of 325 years, the Vedovskoye process. I mean the hearing in the Judicial Committee of the Senate to approve the judge of the Supreme Court Brett Cavanano.

Here we need to make a small digression and remind you that in the system of checks and counterweights of the post of judge of the US Supreme Court is the only lifelong post. And this is done specifically so that the electoral considerations do not affect the court decisions. What does this post do unusually important: after all, the US president, who appointed the judge, may already leave, and the judge will continue to make the key to the nation.

The history of ordeals Brett Cavanano is best started from February 13, 2016, when Judge Antonin Skalia appointed by Reagan died. The outgoing President Obama proposed to this post by Judge Merrick Garland, but the republican majority in the Senate blocked his appointment, saying that the right to appoint anyone was moving on to the next president.

It was a dirty trick, but he had a success: shortly after the election, President Trump appointed a conservative judge Neil Gorsuch to the place of the rampant.

In 2018, a new vacancy was released. Judge Anthony Kennedy announced that he was resting, and in July this year, President Trump introduced the candidacy of Brett Cavanano to the Senate.

It was then that the democrats fell off. Indeed, in the case of a coward, one conservative judge replaced another conservative, here the conservative of Cavano replaced the moderate judge - and his voice became key to fateful decisions.

Democrats vowed to do everything to stop the appointment of Cavano.

And when all the means of struggle were already used, on the eve of the voting day, Professor Christina Blazy Ford appeared in the public and stated that Brett Cavano broke her life.

Once (she doesn’t remember when) and somewhere (she doesn’t remember where) at a party, when the professor was 15, Brett Cavano and his friend threw her on the bed and wanted to abuse, but she escaped. The drunk Cavano closed her mouth with his hand, and she thought that now he would kill her, and to everything else, he made louder music in the bedroom to drown out the screams.

All this happened 36 years ago and broke her whole life. The fact that she studied poorly at the university was a consequence of a terrible injury that the rapist inflicted on her. She did not have a personal life, and this was also the fault of this. She was afraid to fly, and the reason for this was the same Cavano.

Ms. Ford-a convinced, if not fanatical supporter of the Democrats, signed petitions against Trump. And her story was published exactly on the eve of the voting of the committee. Which did not allow investigating the circumstances before the vote without breaking it off. The breakdown of voting meant that the candidacy of Brett Cavano would not be entered into the Senate until the November elections. And this, in turn, gave a chance that his candidate would not be approved by the Senate if the Democrats win the elections.

This is a brilliant political maneuver that put the Republicans before an unpleasant alternative. Or they ignore the accusations that suddenly arose after three months of discussion - and then they either act as white sexists with the subsequent loss of votes, or they postpone the vote, and the Cavano will not be approved in the position before the November elections.

Of course - a brilliant maneuver. But only the time chosen by Senator Faynstain and Mr. Ford to publish the accusations indicates that the objective investigation was not their goal.

Republicans tried to save the situation. They were ready to listen to Ms. Ford on Friday, which made it possible to vote on Monday or Tuesday.

However, unforeseen circumstances were drawn here. Ms. Ford did not want to perform at the hearing: she wanted the incident to investigate the FBI. In fact, this is somewhat difficult, because: a) Ms. Ford did not remember the time when this disgrace occurred, nor the place where it happened; And b) this is not in the competence of the FBI. In addition, the FBI checked Brett Cavano six times already, and Ms. Ford could actually share her information before.

The Senate said that he could transfer the hearing to Tuesday. But here is a new obstacle: Ms. Ford lives in California and is not able to fly to Washington. Her fear of flights was allegedly also a consequence of a terrible injury inflicted by Brett Cavanano. However, then it turned out that Ms. Ford used the services of airlines regularly.

Then the senators suggested flying to Ms. Ford personally. But the unfortunate sacrifice said that she was not aware of such a proposal. What was doubly strange: after all, the proposal sounded on all television channels and was printed in all newspapers.

In the end, the hearings were scheduled for September 27.

Republicans in response suggested that Ms. Ford to interview a third-party prosecutor specializing in violence. The Democrats were again unleashed: here you are not a court, which prosecutor?

The case rested, as it was easy to understand, all in the same November elections: the Republicans were afraid to lose their voice, asking Ms. Ford unpleasant questions. Ms. Ford, in turn, rolled out a whole list of conditions: for example, so that the accused Cavano speaks before her.

While the unfortunate victim was traded, new prosecutors were found. A certain Deborah Ramirez remembered that more than thirty years ago, when she was deadly drunk on the floor, one of the students at a party took off his pants and showed her his cock. Ms. Ramirez was not at first sure that it was just Brett Cavano, and therefore all the participants of the Gulbisch with the question called: “Was it not it”? Friends answered “no”, but Ms. Ramirez, after consultations with her lawyers, was convinced that it was still a cavan.

Another lady, Julie the Svetnik, said that Cavano - no more than no less, led a whole criminal gang of white males, who systematically mixed drugs at parties and then arranged group rape. “I myself became a victim,” Julie said, “and there was a cavan in the house at that time.” It is strange in this regard that the activity of this “porn -tank -brawl”, which was headed by Cavano, did not surfacing during six investments of the FBI through which the candidate for the position of judge went through, and that not one of the victims declared the police.

The lawyer Ms. Svetnik immediately called for respect for her Privacy and forbade asking any questions: it was clear that everyone who dares to ask these questions was a sexist, racist and generally a supporter of Trump.

I must say that such an avalanche -like increase in accusations is characteristic of hysterical Vedovsky epidemics. In the same Salem, for example, it all started with the fact that young girls called a witch a woman with whom their family was at war. And the next “witch” was a woman who doubted the truth of these indications. Then the accusations began to grow like a snowball, and soon the girls darted around the streets of Salem, indicating all new houses in which the witches allegedly lived in hysteria.

I actually thought that such epidemics remained in the past, and did not expect to see the Salem process in the American Senate of the 21st century.

... Finally, the hearings took place. They were made by Christina Blazy Ford and Brett Cavano. Brett Cavano categorically denied everything: he talked about his destroyed reputation, about his family, who is experiencing all this shame, about the hunting for witches and the completely comic accusations of Julie the candlestick. He stated that after school after many years he remained a virgin. Even earlier, Mr. Cavano published his school calendar for 1982, in which he with manic punctuality celebrated his meetings and classes. There is no party in it - Cavano spent all the weekends outside Washington.

The professional psychologist Ms. Ford looked confident and shy. Explaining why she does not remember the time or the scene, she used terms such as Epinephrine and Hippocampus. “Norepinephrine and epinephrine in the brain seem to encode this neutrotransmitter, encode memory in the hippocampus, so that experience related to injury, as if locked there, while other details seem to be erased,” she said.

Unfortunately, the problem of Ms. Ford was that she lied. She passed the polygraph test, for which she flew to Maryland, although she stated that she was afraid to fly. For some reason, there was no expert closer to Meriland, who was ready to confirm that she was telling the truth. At the same time, Ms. Ford refused to submit to the Senate the materials of the examination, and presented only the conclusion.

When asked if the shooting was conducted during the examination, she replied that she did not remember, because she cried all the time. Cried all the time? But since 2012, Ms. Ford told right and left about herself as a victim of violence and never cried. She did not cry at the hearing, telling in detail about her torment. At the same time, as a professional psychologist, Ms. Ford could not know that crying and in general any strong emotions meaning the results of a printing examination-they knock down all the settings.

The destruction of the Facebook account also does not add reliability. Indeed, in the situation, “he said, she said” our ideas about who are right, largely depend on the personality of the speaker, and this personality of Ms. Ford hastened to destroy.

Ms. Ford answered confidently to questions that concerned the events of the 36-year ago and which none of us can judge otherwise than from her words. But for some reason she was constantly confused in the events that took place recently. She could not explain why she was afraid to fly by plane due to the injury inflicted on her, while now she flies calmly. After each such question, she consulted with a lawyer who, as a rule, said: "This is information that is not subject to public announcement."

Another question arises: how many times did Ms. Ford even saw Cavano? Cavano claims that not at all. Friends and the prosecutor and the accused claim that they were not familiar. Ms. Ford did not know Cavano, she was probably very drunk, then how does she know that it was he? She realized this after 36 years and ... exactly before the elections?

All these-and many others-questions could be asked by Ms. Ford at the hearing. But they were not set. Why? For a very simple reason. In the atmosphere of the left -time hysteria reigning in the United States, any questions would be perceived as an insult to an innocent sacrifice. They would be worth the votes in the election to the one who would ask them. Therefore, the Republicans were silent, and the democrats were completely engaged in praising the new Jeanne d'Arc. “You inspired us ... You gave America an amazing lesson in courage ...” said Senator Blumenthal, although, in fact, the hearings were just about whether there was a service? And would Ms. Ford show her society if Brett Cavano was a democrat?

Does all this mean that Ms. Ford is just lying? We don't know. Maybe it was. Or maybe - and a kind. And this, in fact, is the most important thing in this story.

A modern civilized court proceeds from the presumption of innocence. It assumes the availability of evidence. And the evidence obtained by unacceptable ways is prohibited to present - these are rules that stop the condemnation of the innocent.

By this, the modern court differs from the Inquisition, for which everyone who was accused was already obviously guilty.

What happened to Brett Cavano is the Inquisition in its pure form. His prosecutor cannot give any evidence of her innocence. And these accusations would not be made by Ms. Ford if Brett Cavano was a democrat .

This is a mental epidemic. And, as in the case of Salem of 1693, we may not doubt that there will be even more accusations. After all, everyone who doubts them is a fascist, Trump's minister and Republican.

From the editorial office:
The Senate Law Committee nevertheless approved the candidacy of Cavan to the post of judge and sent it to the Senate for a general vote, but with one condition-the investigation of the FBI under these charges. On Saturday, the FBI opened a new, seventh investigation against Brett Cavano.

It is clear that this process is politicized, but it is indicative, because it concerns the institute of reputation, which is fundamental for the Western world. This is when a career and further life of a person and politics, even the highest level, completely depends on the accusations of another person. And the presumption of innocence here does not work until you prove the opposite. In the Russian reality today, this is difficult to even imagine.