Chuck Grassley said there are two men that have come forward to claim
they are the ones who tried to rape Christine Blasey Ford. 
I just heard on Don Lemmon's show.
Republicans are running around talking about smears and con job. Two men coming forward to accept responsibility? O.M.G. *That* is a con job.
I hope they try to run with this because no one in their right mind will believe some guys would come forward, risk their jobs, their marriages/relationships, reputation to save Kavanaugh???? 
= new reply since forum marked as read
It appears that it isn’t a case of two men claiming that the two of them assaulted Ford instead of Kavanaugh and Judge. No, it appears that each of the men is, separately, claiming that he AND Judge were the assailants. So, it’s essentially each man claiming “it was me, not Kavanaugh.”
Could it backfire on the Republicans? (Btw, is it unusual for people to claim they committed crimes they did not? Are police investigators often duped by this? 
)
Itm, obviously those voters who already firmly dismissed it all as a hoax didn't need this. That leaves those capable of doubt, and probably this won't erase that, though no doubt some will find in it an excuse to believe what they wish. But as passionately as the incredible shrinking Republican Party needs for them to turn out in large numbers on November 6?
Btw, it's not over until it's over. I share your concern, but those who rush to despair can look damned silly as they get back up off their knees. And not even 1% of the nation will know or care that the Democratic Party was careful not to have the polygraph reveal information they didn't want out yet.
Anyway, if we must have another right-wing extremist on SCOTUS, I'm not sure a removable, scandal-plagued justice with serious unresolved legal issues, including likely multiple documented perjuries and receipt of stolen property, is quite the worst thing that could happen.
Two men step forward, claim they raped someone and name their victim, and the police can nothing until the victim asks them?
Does it work that way with bank robberies? Two men come forward and claim they robbed a bank and the police won't question them until a bank asks them to?
I'm actually genuinely wondering here. I understand what you say, and of course they could change their minds AFTER the police start asking questions. But this is before and they're admitting to a violent crime that reportedly is not subject to statute of limitations in its jurisdiction.
Still wondering if it could be opening a door to investigation that would envelope the people who produced them. We're not talking your usual domestic subjects here, after all, but big-time political hard-ball players on both sides. Remember what happened when Trump claimed the Democrats had Trump Tower wired?
Your description of how it typically works is informative, especially in a world where women are still particularly vulnerable to institutionalized victimization.
I have to suspect you're underestimating the applicability of laws and the capabilities of power, though. It's just hard to imagine that any DA or chief of police would be quite this helpless, much less congress.
Hearing to begin soon. Thanks.
