@zenvelo Certainly seems so to me.
@gailcalled Thanks.
@Jaxk It’s not possible they both told the truth about the sequence of events. Anita Hill gave some glaringly specific examples of things she said Thomas had done. The pubic hair on the coke bottle comment. The frequent references to the massive size of his equipment. The references to what he had seen in porno movies. He said she was lying and he had never done those things. The question was not Did Thomas commit sexual harassment? it was Who lied?. And since their testimony was about specific events and they were in direct conflict in their claims, one of them DID LIE.
@Dutchess_III His refusing the test and her taking it and passing nailed it for me. He knew he could indignantly refuse to take the test and, as @zenvelo says, the old boy network would shrug it off.
@bookish1 Yes, the Alito outburst about voting rights for blacks being an entitlement reminded me of how much respect I have lost for the Supreme court over the last few years.
@filmfann See my answer above to @Jaxk.
@elbanditoroso I think you meant Thomas had everything to lose by not lying but yeah.
@bkcunningham Anita Hill explained why she moved to the EEOC with Thomas. She had always wanted to work in Civil Rights enforcement. What she alleged Thomas was doing would certainly be unwelcome to most women, but not necessarily so odious that they would turn down their dream job to avoid it. So I don’t buy that.
@Aster Absolutely. The blame the victim culture is still alive and well in sexual matters. Look no further than the “Legitimate rape” garbage of this past election cycle.
@Gabby101 There were witnesses willing to testify. The senators cut a backroom deal to exclude them.
@Pachyderm_In_The_Room That constantly sagging respect for the impartiality of our judiciary is exactly what led me to ask this question. It’s time Americans take stock of what’s happening to our form of government.
@janbb Absolutely. After an election where voting suppression schemes were attempted in 31 states, we appear poised for all the appointees of the party trying to rig the vote to decide that the real teeth of the Voting Rights Act are no longer needed. Why? Because they get in the way of winning by undemocratic means.
@SuperMouse Thanks.
@Sunny2 Again, the question was not what Clarence Thomas thought. None of us can climb inside his head and discern that. As noted in response to @Jaxk above, Anita Hill made very specific claims made about Clarence Thomas’ behavior. Thomas said those things never happened. The question is not how Thomas felt about what he did or did not do, it is which one was lying. Under the circumstances, one of them had to be lying.
@woodcutter Thanks. Agreed.
@SavoirFaire That’s true.