Wouldn’t a history of alcoholism be a disqualifying factor in of itself?
Not if it is passed history. People have been known to have a problem with alcohol and overcome it later on. Remember you are talking about a history of extremely drinking when he was a teenager. I have heard no one say that he still has a drinking problem. Does extreme drinking necessarily = alcoholism?
I drank heavily during the 4 years I was in college and then pretty much stopped outside occasional social gatherings. Never blacked out, but did get thoroughly wasted on many occasions and it definitely altered my behavior.
It’s entirely possible Kavanaugh did what Ford says he did if he was a heavy drinker. However, labeling him an alcoholic because of heavy college drinking only shows that the person applying the label has no idea what alcoholism is—or is simply using it as a smear to disqualify him or sully his character.
How possible do you think it is that someone could sexually assault someone and totally completely forget it due to extreme drunkenness?
Very possible. I had friends who were heavier drinkers than I was and I’d tell them stories the next day about shit they did or said and they wouldn’t remember.
It’s entirely possible Kavanaugh put his hands on Ford, got too rough and did things that were out of character for him, and had no recollection of it the next day.
The possibility isn’t evidence, though, and the reason I have difficulty with her story is that she remembers literally almost nothing else about the event. I’ve heard both “trauma makes you remember” and “trauma makes you forget”. Either (both?) can be true depending on the person. It’s just not reliable testimony, all due respect to Dr. Ford.