Kavanaugh Has Got to Go

[barn32]

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

[sammy the sage]

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

agree with this...by the way....prepare for incoming....they won't attack your message...they'll attack you...hhhhmmmm sounds familiar doesn't it...

I will say this....the diimwits blew two reputations by holding onto the info for as long as they did...which is really sad for this whole mess...but they didn't care...

[chadk66]

and he'll probably be confirmed anyway.

[Fred Mertz]

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing [beer?] break.




I expected him to comment for 10 minutes and shut up about an event he claims didn't happen.


Then he kept yapping. I predict he dies on the vine.


I don't think he deserves it; just how I read the tea leaves.

[VigorsTheGrey]

The problem with what you are saying is what if he is innocent (and there is no evidence that will hold up in court that he is guilty, which IS the standard of our legal system (innocent until PROVEN guilty)...there may be doubts from this person or that person BUT is there, or can there ever be in this case, “beyond a reasonable doubt”...? If not, this mans life and character has just been assasinated...

They went in knowing that they could never prove ANYTHING and that was never the point...the point was to RAISE SOME DOUBT or to imbroil him further in an investigation of the improbable...to delay his confirmation until after the Nov elections when Dem might have more veto power...clearly a political move by political partisans, and THAT is what is so shameful...Brett has every right to be angry...clearly, another color revolution against ‘whitey the privileged’...never mind that HE WORKED FOR EVERY BIT OF IT...
The Democrats responsible for this vile show are disgusting...

[zico20]

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.

[fast4522]

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.

Should they fail this time, would they try the same thing when its RBG who needs replacement?

[vegasone]

Wow! Must have been watching a different show in a parallel universe. No matter how they supposedly sounded, hope nobody here gets convicted of something because they “sound” guilty. Not that he did, to me at least. They both sounded credible, at least I am not that biased to admit that.
Typical, like my sister, he was already guilty before she even heard any testimony. Why bother, just listen to the media and make your decisions.
Lack of any corrobating evidence , and the people at the supposed party refuting her testimony had no bearing.

Typical of what is happening in this country. People listen to something and hear different things.

[davew]

When they talk about 2012 doctors notes, and yet do not produce these notes ... there is something to hide.

When the Senate democrats hired the lawyers for this accuser ... who must of wrote her responses, as they frequently grabbed a page and pointed to what she should read, most credibility is lost.

When Diane Feinstein says she didn't leak the letter and didn't ask her aides, and then an aide told her she already did ... she is getting too senile for her position and has to go.

When notes and inscriptions in a high school yearbook have relevance to a supreme court nomination, something is wrong with the process.

So I agree he has got to go ... to the Supreme Court :ThmbUp:

[Suff]

Wow! Must have been watching a different show in a parallel universe. No matter how they supposedly sounded, hope nobody here gets convicted of something because they “sound” guilty. Not that he did, to me at least. They both sounded credible, at least I am not that biased to admit that.
Typical, like my sister, he was already guilty before she even heard any testimony. Why bother, just listen to the media and make your decisions.
Lack of any corrobating evidence , and the people at the supposed party refuting her testimony had no bearing.

Typical of what is happening in this country. People listen to something and hear different things.

My take away is the same as yours. My heart ripped open for both of them. Her, Him, his Kids... awful thing.

[Burls]

The problem with what you are saying is what if he is innocent (and there is no evidence that will hold up in court that he is guilty, which IS the standard of our legal system (innocent until PROVEN guilty)...there may be doubts from this person or that person BUT is there, or can there ever be in this case, “beyond a reasonable doubt”...? If not, this mans life and character has just been assasinated...

They went in knowing that they could never prove ANYTHING and that was never the point...the point was to RAISE SOME DOUBT or to imbroil him further in an investigation of the improbable...to delay his confirmation until after the Nov elections when Dem might have more veto power...clearly a political move by political partisans, and THAT is what is so shameful...Brett has every right to be angry...clearly, another color revolution against ‘whitey the privileged’...never mind that HE WORKED FOR EVERY BIT OF IT...
The Democrats responsible for this vile show are disgusting...
The problem: People who are falsely accused don't act like Brett Kavanaugh acted.
He was a caricature of a falsely accused person.
He acted in the way he was instructed to act after days of coaching in the White House.
He came across as contrived and artificial.
Unlike Blasey-Ford, Kavanaugh did not come across as genuine and believable.

He dodged and dodged and dodged the question of whether or not he would support a thorough FBI investigation regarding the relevant events.

He gave a ridiculously implausible story about the 'Renate Alumnius'.
"Oh No. A group of high school boys on a the football team weren't making a sexual joke about a female student at her expense. We were honoring her as a fellow member of our group. That's what the 'Renate Alumnius' was about."
Do you really think people are that stupid, Brett?
If you're going to lie, at least try to tell some minimally plausible lies.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Burls]

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.
Right.
I can still remember how they did that with Gorsuch.

:bang:

[fast4522]

The problem: People who are falsely accused don't act like Brett Kavanaugh acted.
He was a caricature of a falsely accused person.
He acted in the way he was instructed to act after days of coaching in the White House.
He came across as contrived and artificial.
Unlike Blasey-Ford, Kavanaugh did not come across as genuine and believable.

He dodged and dodged and dodged the question of whether or not he would support a thorough FBI investigation regarding the relevant events.

He gave a ridiculously implausible story about the 'Renate Alumnius'.
"Oh No. A group of high school boys on a the football team weren't making a sexual joke about a female student at her expense. We were honoring her as a fellow member of our group. That's what the 'Renate Alumnius' was about."
Do you really think people are that stupid, Brett?
If you're going to lie, at least try to tell some minimally plausible lies.


Like you have much experience about deeply religious people, your experence is obvious just by your posts.

[Burls]

Like you have much experience about deeply religious people, your experence is obvious just by your posts.
Focus on the substance of the comments, please.
If they are implausible, explain why.
Don't waste time bringing my character into question.
You are just making it obvious to all that you have nothing useful to add here.

[JustRalph]

What a load of crap.

I actually scored him on body language using my DVR.

Once upon a time I was certified to do interrogations and interviews.

He scored truthful 32-4 on my scale.

Take that for what it’s worth.

If you’re a Dem you should be ashamed........

[Burls]

What a load of crap.

I actually scored him on body language using my DVR.

Once upon a time I was certified to do interrogations and interviews.

He scored truthful 32-4 on my scale.

Take that for what it’s worth.

If you’re a Dem you should be ashamed........I believe that.

[elysiantraveller]

What a load of crap.

I actually scored him on body language using my DVR.

Once upon a time I was certified to do interrogations and interviews.

He scored truthful 32-4 on my scale.

Take that for what it’s worth.

If you’re a Dem you should be ashamed........

How did Ford score?

I'm genuinely curious.

[fast4522]

Focus on the substance of the comments, please.
If they are implausible, explain why.
Don't waste time bringing my character into question.
You are just making it obvious to all that you have nothing useful to add here.

I was, Brett Kavanaugh is deeply religious and always has been. You have
demonstrated lack of facts, knowledge, or the ability to understand human
behavior. Then you comment on the behavior of each witness to suit your limited capacity, if I was really profiling you my wording would contain very derogatory projections.

[incoming]

I think Mrs. Ford is the Poster Child for the New Democrat Party......DELUSIONAL. Never let the facts get in the way of a feel good moment. She needs to be in a special place.....HELL. Exactly......what would be created if her type of #METO movement was created. May God have mercy on her soul. Amen. :popcorn::popcorn:

[sammy the sage]

I was, Brett Kavanaugh is deeply religious and always has been.

Yes...he does have THAT Catholic feel to him...what-ever I do for the whole week will be forgiven on Sunday....:rolleyes:.....wonder if he went to choir practice as well...

[chadk66]

Democrats have stooped to a new low now. The rules of how this is done has to change drastically.

[wisconsin]

I think Mrs. Ford is the Poster Child for the New Democrat Party......DELUSIONAL. Never let the facts get in the way of a feel good moment. She needs to be in a special place.....HELL. Exactly......what would be created if her type of #METO movement was created. May God have mercy on her soul. Amen. :popcorn::popcorn:



She was simply an opportunist who thought an anonymous "tip" would derail this guy. But it backfired when her name was released, and she was forced to run with her story. That's why Di-Fi secured her high end counsel. She couldn't even get the timeline of the past 2 months in order, yet we are to believe her version of what happened 36 years ago?

Nobody asked what color the room was, or what song she heard (music in the room). I would imagine these things would also be unforgettable.

People are too gullible, because she was a woman.

[MutuelClerk]

I didn't really like the way he answered questions either. That being said i predict it ends up 50-50 with Pence breaking the tie. My prediction is based on a Republican voting against late when they know it's "safe".

Politics = No business like show business.

[Tom]

He dodged and dodged and dodged the question of whether or not he would support a thorough FBI investigation regarding the relevant events.

No, he did not.
People who listened heard him agree to whatever the COMMITTEE wanted to do.

100% right answer.

It is NOT his job to prove his innocence - this is America - presumed innocent applies to all.

Lie detectors are not admissible in Fed courts, because they are, of course, UNRELIABLE.

Zero evidence that it happened and three signed witness statements - the very people SHE named - say never happened.

The dems were playing to a fool's audience.
And you enjoyed the show.

[Tom]

My take away is the same as yours. My heart ripped open for both of them. Her, Him, his Kids... awful thing.

Agree.
SHE was betrayed and used.

The whole thing COULD have been handled out of public eye, and WITH an FBI investigation.

But the truth was never the goal here.

Ask any poker players, when you go ALL IN, your DAMN well better have the hand.
-------------Louie CK, 2018

Sad two families are used like this by a corrupt and disgusting government.

[Tom]

I didn't really like the way he answered questions either. That being said i predict it ends up 50-50 with Pence breaking the tie. My prediction is based on a Republican voting against late when they know it's "safe".

Politics = No business like show business.

I thought he did a good job of being totally uncooperative and showing how stupid and petty the dems were.
Getting in their faces.

He has learned how to play their game.

No questions were left unanswered.
The dems kept asking the same ones over and over.

Trying to interpret YEARBOOK comments!
THIS is the democrat party of today?:lol::lol::lol:

You should see some of the comments in YM yearbook.:eek:

You play by the rules of the game the other guy plays by.
High time the GOP learned that.

[Burls]

I was, Brett Kavanaugh is deeply religious and always has been. You have
demonstrated lack of facts, knowledge, or the ability to understand human
behavior. Then you comment on the behavior of each witness to suit your limited capacity, if I was really profiling you my wording would contain very derogatory projections.
Blah Blah Blah

[Burls]

No, he did not.
People who listened heard him agree to whatever the COMMITTEE wanted to do.

100% right answer.

It is NOT his job to prove his innocence - this is America - presumed innocent applies to all.

Lie detectors are not admissible in Fed courts, because they are, of course, UNRELIABLE.

Zero evidence that it happened and three signed witness statements - the very people SHE named - say never happened.

The dems were playing to a fool's audience.
And you enjoyed the show.
This was addressed earlier.
Try to pay attention.

Kavanaugh is not the accused in a criminal trial here.
He is a candidate in the process of being adjudicated for a prestigious, influential, LIFETIME public appointment.
If an accusation is made against a such a candidate, that candidate is not entitled to the presumption of innocence until they have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as they would if they were the accused in a criminal trial.
That's not how it works with the kind of prestigious, influential, public appointment Brett Kavanaugh is being considered for.
If there are some grounds to think the candidate has engaged in wrongful activity, the nomination should be withdrawn.
The standard for disqualifying such a candidate are simply NOT AS HIGH as the standards for finding the accused guilty in a criminal trial.
Further, the standards of conduct expected of a Supreme Court Justice are much higher than the standards of conduct expected of an ordinary citizen.
And remember, this is a prestigious, influential, LIFETIME Public appointment, that, once made, cannot be undone.
For these reasons, in the past, Kavanaugh's nomination would have been withdrawn long ago.

[Show Me the Wire]

This was addressed earlier.
Try to pay attention.

Kavanaugh is not the accused in a criminal trial here.
He is a candidate in the process of being adjudicated for a prestigious, influential, LIFETIME public appointment.
If an accusation is made against a such a candidate, that candidate is not entitled to the presumption of innocence until they have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as they would if they were the accused in a criminal trial.
That's not how it works with the kind of prestigious, influential, public appointment Brett Kavanaugh is being considered for.
If there are some grounds to think the candidate has engaged in wrongful activity, the nomination should be withdrawn.
The standard for disqualifying such a candidate are simply NOT AS HIGH as the standards for finding the accused guilty in a criminal trial.
Further, the standards of conduct expected of a Supreme Court Justice are much higher than the standards of conduct expected of an ordinary citizen.
And remember, this is a prestigious, influential, LIFETIME Public appointment, that, once made, cannot be undone.
For these reasons, in the past, Kavanaugh's nomination would have been withdrawn long ago.


Pay attention. Kavanaugh is open to legal jeopardy. Ford is accusing kavanaugh of a crime, for which Kavanaugh can be prosecuted.

The appropriate action, for Ford, is to swear out a complaint with the local police force if she really is 100% certain Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.

The unanswered question by Ford, is why didn't she swear out the complaint.

[Burls]

Pay attention. Kavanaugh is open to legal jeopardy. Ford is accusing kavanaugh of a crime, for which Kavanaugh can be prosecuted.

The appropriate action, for Ford, is to swear out a complaint with the local police force if she really is 100% certain Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.

The unanswered question by Ford, is why didn't she swear out the complaint.
Blah Blah Blah.
Address the quote instead of changing the subject.

[Show Me the Wire]

Blah Blah Blah.
Address the quote instead of changing the subject.

I did. Your quote is incorrect. It is a criminal accusation against Kavanaugh subjecting Kavanaugh to legal jeopardy. A simple job interview does not include legal jeopardy accusations.

Ford's failure to file a sworn complaint in the proper law enforcement authority goes to the credibility of her allegations.

[FantasticDan]

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045697391997972480

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045702645061746688

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045705268384927744

[Show Me the Wire]

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045697391997972480

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045702645061746688

https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1045705268384927744

The truth. The accuser's claim about a specific party and/or "gathering" happened has been refuted by three independent witnesses, named by the accuser, as witnesses to the "party" that such a "party" happened.

[Tom]

Sharp reply.
YOU get it.

[Clocker]

If an accusation is made against a such a candidate, that candidate is not entitled to the presumption of innocence until they have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as they would if they were the accused in a criminal trial.


Do you have a cite to a law, court case, Senate rule, etc., that establishes this deviation from a fundamental principle of American law?

[Tom]

Will a meme suffice?

:lol::lol::lol:

[JustRalph]

How did Ford score?

I'm genuinely curious.

I didn’t do her yet.....it’s a time consuming deal. But, I’ve already said she’s a lying bitch......I might be biased....:lol:

[elysiantraveller]

I didn’t do her yet.....it’s a time consuming deal. But, I’ve already said she’s a lying bitch......I might be biased....:lol:

Yeah... well at least you disclosed it. :lol:

I would be curious though what all goes into it and would it be helpful in stuff like poker?

[barahona44]

Yeah... well at least you disclosed it. :lol:



He did use the word "yet".;) :cool:

[FantasticDan]

He did use the word "yet".;) :cool:
Obviously all she needed to do was act like a rabid and desperate wacko like Kavanaugh did, and she'd score great on Ralph's scale.

Unfortunately she was restrained and polite, so she's got lying bitch written all over her :p

[ReplayRandall]

Obviously all she needed to do was act like a rabid and desperate wacko like Kavanaugh did, and she'd score great on Ralph's scale.

Unfortunately she was restrained and polite, so she's got lying bitch written all over her :p


I was wrong about you....Twice in one week you made me laugh out loud. This is one of those times....Surprising, to say the least.

[Show Me the Wire]

Obviously all she needed to do was act like a rabid and desperate wacko like Kavanaugh did, and she'd score great on Ralph's scale.

Unfortunately she was restrained and polite, so she's got lying bitch written all over her :p

Right:ThmbUp: Being indignant about being falsely accused of criminal sexual assault is inappropriate.:bang:

[Show Me the Wire]

A little tidbit for all you Kavanough got to go group. You keep referencing that other people like her husband and friends believe her. The people who know her best especially at the time of the alleged party, her parents and her siblings have not come out in support of their family member.

Do you find it strange her immediate family has not endorsed her credibility?

[FantasticDan]

Right:ThmbUp: Being indignant about being falsely accused of criminal sexual assault is inappropriate.:bang:
I'm totally fine with indignant, but that performance was something well beyond (or below) that...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brett-kavanaugh-hearing-moments-730328/

Again, this person is supposed to be the best of the best. I've seen 8th graders act with more intelligence and maturity..

[Tom]

Obviously all she needed to do was act like a rabid and desperate wacko like Kavanaugh did, and she'd score great on Ralph's scale.

Unfortunately she was restrained and polite, so she's got lying bitch written all over her :p

One again, you make no sense.
Restrained and polite have zero to with lying.
Most liars are likely to try to be believable and likable.
Special K was reacting angrily to the A hole democrats who trying to railroad him. She, calm, vague, HE livid, Positive.

[Tom]

A little tidbit for all you Kavanough got to go group. You keep referencing that other people like her husband and friends believe her. The people who know her best especially at the time of the alleged party, her parents and her siblings have not come out in support of their family member.

Do you find it strange her immediate family has not endorsed her credibility?

Once again, you hit it our of the park.
Those with NO knowledge believer HER.
Those who were there DO NOT.

[Show Me the Wire]

I'm totally fine with indignant, but that performance was something well beyond (or below) that...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brett-kavanaugh-hearing-moments-730328/

Again, this person is supposed to be the best of the best. I've seen 8th graders act with more intelligence and maturity..

Not in my opinion. In my opinion a sitting senator using a high school yearbook as an impeachment tool is 8th grader like.

Also, in my opinion Ford constantly looking for guidance from her attorneys about which note to read as answers to every question is very 8th graderish.

[Tom]

Not in my opinion. In my opinion a sitting senator using a high school yearbook as an impeachment tool is 8th grader like.

Also, in my opinion Ford constantly looking for guidance from her attorneys about which note to read as answers to every question is very 8th graderish.

Quoting a yearbook - sound like something Dan would do.:lol:

Attorneys arranged by the democrats in early august.

[Show Me the Wire]

Quoting a yearbook - sound like something Dan would do.:lol:


I absolutely agree :D:D:D

[jimmyb]

I didn’t do her yet.....it’s a time consuming deal. But, I’ve already said she’s a lying bitch......I might be biased....:lol:

yep... like her fear of flying, yet she's flown everywhere except Timbuctoo.

[ReplayRandall]

I didn’t do her yet.....it’s a time consuming deal. But, I’ve already said she’s a lying bitch......I might be biased....:lol:

While you're at it, do Paula Blasey AKA Christine Ford:

https://www.facebook.com/paula.blasey

[JustRalph]

Yeah... well at least you disclosed it. :lol:

I would be curious though what all goes into it and would it be helpful in stuff like poker?

The really good poker guys are already aware. It has served me well in a few games though. But I’ve never played w pro’s

https://www.reid.com

Look up “ the Reid technique” on YouTube.

Btw, these techniques are exaggerated in children and those intoxicated. Practice on kids......

[davew]

One again, you make no sense.
Restrained and polite have zero to with lying.
Most liars are likely to try to be believable and likable.
Special K was reacting angrily to the A hole democrats who trying to railroad him. She, calm, vague, HE livid, Positive.

You are confusing liars with psychopaths (like the dim Senators on the committee).

[lamboguy]

A little tidbit for all you Kavanaugh got to go group. You keep referencing that other people like her husband and friends believe her. The people who know her best especially at the time of the alleged party, her parents and her siblings have not come out in support of their family member.

Do you find it strange her immediate family has not endorsed her credibility?
the lady's 2 blood sisters came on Fox News yesterday to show support of their sister. one of them's last name was something like Milber.

i have been watching Fox News throughout this thing to get their perspective on it, and for the first time i sense that they are even changing their minds on the accused.

everyone is giving credibility to the lady accuser that the event happened, they just haven't pinned the blame on Kavanaugh yet because there is ZERO proof so far. . i don't know if you will ever get the proof you need either. that is probably why most of the committee did not vote against him. even Flake didn't go against him, but he did do the most sensible thing and call for the investigation before he votes. if what the accused did not mix up people, the investigation should produce solid evidence to place blame on Kavanaugh. if not he should be able to serve on The Supreme Court in good conscience.

i truly think that even the most vigorous supporters of Kavanaugh on this board welcome this investigation to set the record straight one way or the other, and can see why he must not go forward until his name is cleared.

for the record, i am not in favor of Kavanaugh, but if there is no solid proof, i believe he should get his seat.

[Tom]

Lambo,

Even it did happen, NOTHING in his adult life on the bench suggests he is not fully qualified.
unlike the liberal Justice-POS who tries to use foreign law instead of the constitution.

A REAL LIFE disgrace to the courts and real life DANGEROUS loose cannon. What could SPecial K possible do to be more of a problem that this other anti-American bottom feeder?

But the upside is that the dems have now lowered the bar for candidates for office, nominees, whatever. ANY liberal is now subject to intense scrutiny of yearbooks, writings, social media, yo name it. Wonder how THEY will live up to it? :pound::pound::pound:

OH, and of course we will be able to now reference unsigned letters received with no return addresses, as actual proof.

I bet we will find much more dirt on stinking liberals in college than they will find on righites.

[elysiantraveller]

Lambo,

Even it did happen, NOTHING in his adult life on the bench suggests he is not fully qualified.
unlike the liberal Justice-POS who tries to use foreign law instead of the constitution.

A REAL LIFE disgrace to the courts and real life DANGEROUS loose cannon. What could SPecial K possible do to be more of a problem that this other anti-American bottom feeder?

But the upside is that the dems have now lowered the bar for candidates for office, nominees, whatever. ANY liberal is now subject to intense scrutiny of yearbooks, writings, social media, yo name it. Wonder how THEY will live up to it? :pound::pound::pound:

He is flat out unqualified.

This is a job interview for a position you can't be fired from and gives absolute power.

I'm sorry but this is bullshit because it would mean he's a liar in the one profession where telling the truth is kind of a big deal.

What you're doing is making excuses instead of just demanding someone better for the job...

Look at Trump's other supreme court nominee... you may like or dislike the guy but his character and integrity aren't something that are up for debate.

[Tom]

Why is he unqualified?
What has he done on the job that makes him unqualified?

[Show Me the Wire]

the lady's 2 blood sisters came on Fox News yesterday to show support of their sister. one of them's last name was something like Milber.

i have been watching Fox News throughout this thing to get their perspective on it, and for the first time i sense that they are even changing their minds on the accused.

everyone is giving credibility to the lady accuser that the event happened, they just haven't pinned the blame on Kavanaugh yet because there is ZERO proof so far. . i don't know if you will ever get the proof you need either. that is probably why most of the committee did not vote against him. even Flake didn't go against him, but he did do the most sensible thing and call for the investigation before he votes. if what the accused did not mix up people, the investigation should produce solid evidence to place blame on Kavanaugh. if not he should be able to serve on The Supreme Court in good conscience.

i truly think that even the most vigorous supporters of Kavanaugh on this board welcome this investigation to set the record straight one way or the other, and can see why he must not go forward until his name is cleared.

for the record, i am not in favor of Kavanaugh, but if there is no solid proof, i believe he should get his seat.


Flake as usual is too blind to see the deceit. Did any dem senator who asked Kavanaugh to request an F.B.I. investigation to "prove" his innocence of a criminal accusation against him, state that they would support Kavanaugh's nomination, if Kavanaugh would make such a request? How about today, did any of the dem committee members tell Kavanaugh they would support him if the F.B.I. found no corroborating evidence to support Ford's accusations? I heard many vote no to the candidate, even with the deal in place. Does the above sound like dems wanting to get to the truth or make a power play?

Graham stated in plainly yesterday and Flake supported the dems, power play, in this charade. He even indirectly chided Flake, for his stupidity, by Graham saying I hope some dems will come forth and say they will support kavanaugh after the investigation.

[fast4522]

Why is he unqualified?
What has he done on the job that makes him unqualified?

Because Judge Kavanaugh does not advance HIS ultra liberal beliefs, plain and simple.

[Tom]

I hope some dems will come forth and say they will support kavanaugh after the investigation.

Objection, your Honor.
Assumes integrity not in evidence.

[Tom]

Because Judge Kavanaugh does not advance HIS ultra liberal beliefs, plain and simple.

Yeah, I was being sarcastic. :lol:

[Show Me the Wire]

I kind of felt sorry for Flake,he had that some look, on his face, as the dog owners who had their dogs killed, in a fire, while in the care of Flake's son.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/gilbert-breaking/2016/06/30/green-acre-kennel-owners-accept-plea-deal-deaths-more-than-20-dogs-gilbert/86563596/

[elysiantraveller]

Why is he unqualified?
What has he done on the job that makes him unqualified?

Even it did happen, NOTHING in his adult life on the bench suggests he is not fully qualified.

You said it... not me...

Isn't a Bill Clinton a rapist in your book?

Wasn't John Edwards unfit to serve because of his affair?

Your standards swing pretty wildly if the accused is a Republican.

Maybe they will herd some more sluts this week though... not that it will matter to you... amirite? :headbanger:

[Tom]

Circular logic.
IF this never came up, THEN what makes him unqualified.

I can accept you using this as a reason, BUT, you have been saying he is unqualified all along.
Why is what I am asking.

[Tom]

I kind of felt sorry for Flake,he had that some look, on his face, as the dog owners who had their dogs killed, in a fire, while in the care of Flake's son.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/gilbert-breaking/2016/06/30/green-acre-kennel-owners-accept-plea-deal-deaths-more-than-20-dogs-gilbert/86563596/

Flake is pretty cheap.
Sells out and lies in under an hour.
I can see him becoming a democrat.

[Show Me the Wire]

Flake is pretty cheap.
Sells out and lies in under an hour.
I can see him becoming a democrat.

They need him as a repub. The dems need a useful idiot in the opposition party.

[elysiantraveller]

Circular logic.
IF this never came up, THEN what makes him unqualified.

I can accept you using this as a reason, BUT, you have been saying he is unqualified all along.
Why is what I am asking.

No I haven't.

The day Kavanaugh was named:

This whole thing is much ado about nothing.

Conservative jurist steps down and is replaced by another conservative jurist.

Both sides need to pop some xanax... the sky is not falling nor has America been delivered to some "promised land."

It was in reference to the joyous gravy and hero worship being tossed around here.

But yeah... Kavanaugh seems a bit like his predecessor in that he will break ranks depending on his interpretation of the law.

Most of his rulings have made some sense to me and not a fan of others... its the way the court goes...

He does have the ability to articulate his reasoning behind his actions which is important especially if you don't agree with them. Roberts' swing vote on the mandate is an example of one I hated but the method in which he drew his conclusion was logical.

Then I really didn't talk about Kavanaugh much because the GOP couldn't possibly **** this up could they...?

Then the story broke.

[Show Me the Wire]

No I haven't.

The day Kavanaugh was named:





Then I really didn't talk about Kavanaugh much because the GOP couldn't possibly **** this up could they...?

Then the story broke.

Thank you for clearly identifying that you are the Jeff Flake of the board. Then a story without corroboration broke and now Kavanaugh is now unfit.

[lamboguy]

the best way to put Kavanaugh is that he looks great for one moment and then he falls apart. his personality shows no consistency to me. maybe we watched different television feeds during his hearing the other day. i don't care if the judge is liberal or conservative, i just want them to be steady with an open mind. Kavanaugh does not appear to have those traits.

but don't go by the way i think, wait until the vote comes up on him and see how many of the biased Republican's vote against him, because we already know that all the biased Democrats are voting no, no matter what.

[elysiantraveller]

Thank you for clearly identifying that you are the Jeff Flake of the board. Then a story without corroboration broke and now Kavanaugh is now unfit.

I missed all of the allegations against Neil Gorsuch...

Brett Kavanaugh does not come across as an honest person at this point...

72 hours ago he was a choir boy who occasionally drank and was a virgin in high school and many years after...

Now...

He really likes beer... :rolleyes:

Yeah we can do better...

[Greyfox]

Yeah we can do better...

After this week only an idiot of a man would let their good name stand for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Conceivably, in a few years, the Court will be populated by women as the elder justices die off.
That hearing was a circus that should never be allowed in town again.

[elysiantraveller]

After this week only an idiot of a man would let their good name stand for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Conceivably, in a few years, the Court will be populated by women as the elder justices die off.
That hearing was a circus that should never be allowed in town again.

We shouldn't have gotten to this week.

I said that last week.

[lamboguy]

After this week only an idiot of a man would let their good name stand for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Conceivably, in a few years, the Court will be populated by women as the elder justices die off.
That hearing was a circus that should never be allowed in town again.you make an excellent point, what i believe is that Kavanaugh to this day probably doesn't know what he did. i say that because when he testified he looked fairly credible at times. in any case we are going to get an investigation and see what comes out of it.

[Show Me the Wire]

you make an excellent point, what i believe is that Kavanaugh to this day probably doesn't know what he did. i say that because when he testified he looked fairly credible at times. in any case we are going to get an investigation and see what comes out of it.

What will happen is Ford's attorneys will help her recall another witness name, which has never been mentioned in therapy or any other conversations with Ford's husband and friends. A witness who could collaborate that a party took place at a certain house and the witness will be able to confirm that the witness saw Kavanaugh at the house.

Not enough to prove anything happened, but just enough to throw Kavanaugh's credibility into question.

[railbird]

He gave a ridiculously implausible story about the 'Renate Alumnius'.
"Oh No. A group of high school boys on a the football team weren't making a sexual joke about a female student at her expense. We were honoring her as a fellow member of our group. That's what the 'Renate Alumnius' was about."
Do you really think people are that stupid, Brett?
If you're going to lie, at least try to tell some minimally plausible lies.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

OK What exactly does 'Renate Alumnius' ."mean , I did not attend college
confused:

[woodtoo]

At a party one day in 1982 someone touched Christine Ford's boob.

I hope that clears this up for everyone. No need to call in the FBI.

[davew]

Is this the LETTER ?? why is it rough draft ?? Doesn't the professor know how to use a computer and edit ??

https://s3.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/rw53bLQhDaZdnEFz9uQrdQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NTA0O3E9NzU7c209MTtpbD1wbGFuZQ--/https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/christine-blasey-ford-handwritten-account-ht-jc-180926_hpEmbed_5x6_608.jpg

[woodtoo]

Incredible in looks like a 15 year old wrote it.

[ReplayRandall]

Is this the LETTER ?? why is it rough draft ?? Doesn't the professor know how to use a computer and edit ??

https://s3.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/rw53bLQhDaZdnEFz9uQrdQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NTA0O3E9NzU7c209MTtpbD1wbGFuZQ--/https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/christine-blasey-ford-handwritten-account-ht-jc-180926_hpEmbed_5x6_608.jpg

Dave, I thought that Feinstein had this under wraps since JULY.....Must be just a verbal accusation at first and then was asked to right it down in her own handwriting for authenticity and verification sake?...Give me your take on this.

[Tom]

It was written during her first coffee break.

[Show Me the Wire]

What I found interesting about the prosecutor's questioning is that she kept on returning to the question did you write this letter by yourself or did someone help you. She asked Ford this question multiple times throughout the hearing. Each time Ford acknowledged that she was the sole author. Additionally, the prosecutor focused on the chain of custody for the letter.

The specific line of questioning made me go hmmm. An experienced prosecutor asks the same question multiple times to lock in the witness testimony.

[Tom]

I am guessing all of this has been turned over to the FBI by now.
Lying under oath? Hmmmmmm.

Be funny as hell if SHE goes to jail and HE goes to to the SC.

Maybe she can bunk with Cosby!

[davew]

Dave, I thought that Feinstein had this under wraps since JULY.....Must be just a verbal accusation at first and then was asked to right it down in her own handwriting for authenticity and verification sake?...Give me your take on this.

I do not know what to think (even if this is the letter). It is no wonder that Senator Feinstein did not get to excited about this. I am wondering about multiple personalities.

Maybe the Trump haters could give a better explanation?

[Tom]

I would love to be able to SMELL that letter.
I bet it was once wrapped around a dead fish. :pound::pound::pound:

[Show Me the Wire]

I do not know what to think (even if this is the letter). It is no wonder that Senator Feinstein did not get to excited about this. I am wondering about multiple personalities.

Maybe the Trump haters could give a better explanation?

Multiple personalities. Good suggestion.

[Burls]

I would love to be able to SMELL that letter.
I bet it was once wrapped around a dead fish. :pound::pound::pound:There is absolutely no need top bring up Rudy Giuliani here, Tom.
Hasn't he suffered enough?

[ReplayRandall]

There is absolutely no need top bring up Rudy Giuliani here, Tom.
Hasn't he suffered enough?

Never mind about your Rudy puns.....Give me your take on the written letter by Ford in post#77, seriously if you don't mind.

[OntheRail]

It's the little things...


Okay... If she was never in this house before. How did she know that the bathroom was upstairs?

She say she got up and went up the stairs... She did not ask anyone where it was so she must of been in that house before.

So why is it she can not recall where it is?

[Tom]

It's the little things...


Okay... If she was never in this house before. How did she know that the bathroom was upstairs?

She say she got up and went up the stairs... She did not ask anyone where it was so she must of been in that house before.

So why is it she can not recall where it is?

Maybe she was drunk last time she was there.

She went upstairs, wandered into the kids bedroom and tripped over two teddy bears and had to wrestle them to get up.

She saw a man's suit hanging on the back of the door.

[JustRalph]

It's the little things...


Okay... If she was never in this house before. How did she know that the bathroom was upstairs?

She say she got up and went up the stairs... She did not ask anyone where it was so she must of been in that house before.

So why is it she can not recall where it is?

Stop making so much sense. The first almost rape victim in the history of the world who can’t tell you where it happen :rolleyes:

[FantasticDan]

https://twitter.com/sifill_ldf/status/1046053123570241536

[PaceAdvantage]

the lady's 2 blood sisters came on Fox News yesterday to show support of their sister. one of them's last name was something like Milber.

i have been watching Fox News throughout this thing to get their perspective on it, and for the first time i sense that they are even changing their minds on the accused.

everyone is giving credibility to the lady accuser that the event happened, they just haven't pinned the blame on Kavanaugh yet because there is ZERO proof so far. . i don't know if you will ever get the proof you need either. that is probably why most of the committee did not vote against him. even Flake didn't go against him, but he did do the most sensible thing and call for the investigation before he votes. if what the accused did not mix up people, the investigation should produce solid evidence to place blame on Kavanaugh. if not he should be able to serve on The Supreme Court in good conscience.

i truly think that even the most vigorous supporters of Kavanaugh on this board welcome this investigation to set the record straight one way or the other, and can see why he must not go forward until his name is cleared.

for the record, i am not in favor of Kavanaugh, but if there is no solid proof, i believe he should get his seat.Now I'm convinced more than one person is using your account. What the hell man? This sounds NOTHING like your recent posts on Kavanaugh. Somebody has HIJACKED your account, and this time, I'm not kidding.

[PaceAdvantage]

He is flat out unqualified.

This is a job interview for a position you can't be fired from and gives absolute power.

I'm sorry but this is bullshit because it would mean he's a liar in the one profession where telling the truth is kind of a big deal.

What you're doing is making excuses instead of just demanding someone better for the job...

Look at Trump's other supreme court nominee... you may like or dislike the guy but his character and integrity aren't something that are up for debate.He's unqualified based on the word of someone with pretty much little else to back it up.

That makes sense.

[FantasticDan]

https://twitter.com/normeisen/status/1046205449018724352

[Show Me the Wire]

https://twitter.com/normeisen/status/1046205449018724352

You are not going to apply the Peter Strzok standard of capable doing job objectively, while holding bias opinions?

Why bother asking, I know the answer. NO.

[Buckeye]

https://twitter.com/normeisen/status/1046205449018724352

When accused of Gang Rape, don't get upset . . .

What about gang banging?

"When they go low we go high."

[Buckeye]

"Rules for Radicals"

I've have already read that,

Worth reading in my opinion.

[davew]

Never mind about your Rudy puns.....Give me your take on the written letter by Ford in post#77, seriously if you don't mind.

As far as dims are concerned, it is not about the specifics of the accusation. It is how Judge Kavanaugh feels about the victim and if he can have any empathy toward her. He clearly showed he does not have the temperment to become a SC justice (in their minds), when he snapped at the Senators and rambled answers taking their time.

And of course, the dims do not know what to make of the scribblings either.

[Burls]

Never mind about your Rudy puns.....Give me your take on the written letter by Ford in post#77, seriously if you don't mind.So it's a hand-written rough draft.
I don't see the big deal.
A lot of people find it difficult to compose on the keyboard.
Maybe she intended to type it out but couldn't for some reason.
So she just sent what she had.
Lots of academics are quirky.

Did you notice Kavanaugh when he first sat down for his Friday remarks?
He's got some OCD.
He had to have every item on the desk in just the right place.
Again, not unusual for bookish, academic types.

[PaceAdvantage]

You guys better pray Kav doesn't get confirmed...if he wasn't against RvW before based on "stari decisis," maybe this whole nasty episode changes his mind...if only for revenge against those who sought to bury him. The monsters you create...

Food for thought.

[fast4522]

You guys better pray Kav doesn't get confirmed...if he wasn't against RvW before based on "stari decisis," maybe this whole nasty episode changes his mind...if only for revenge against those who sought to bury him. The monsters you create...

Food for thought.

That is ammo that you are feeding the left, reality is the other way. I don't believe Judge Kavanaugh blows with the wind. RvW he said is settled law, some don't accept or like that position but it is a single issue. This goes to the core of what is not real, what is real is the constution viewed as it was written and intended. That is exactly why the stakes are so high and is the left's end game, I ask everybody to just stop and think about that. Everything else is just copy and paste and fight to the death to make the United States Europe 2.0.

[tucker6]

Watch the red tide come rolling in this November boys. I love the smell of napalm in the morning. The dimwit voters were already energized. This just woke up the complacent other side. I no longer fear November. The best thing for the dims is if Kavanaugh gets voted into the SC. Otherwise, November is a blood bath imo.

[barahona44]

You guys better pray Kav doesn't get confirmed...if he wasn't against RvW before based on "stari decisis," maybe this whole nasty episode changes his mind...if only for revenge against those who sought to bury him. The monsters you create...

Food for thought.

If so,he doesn't have the temperment to be a justice.

[woodtoo]

You guys better pray Kav doesn't get confirmed...if he wasn't against RvW before based on "stari decisis," maybe this whole nasty episode changes his mind...if only for revenge against those who sought to bury him. The monsters you create...

Food for thought.

I don't like it but it is true "the monsters you create...."

[davew]

Watch the red tide come rolling in this November boys. I love the smell of napalm in the morning. The dimwit voters were already energized. This just woke up the complacent other side. I no longer fear November. The best thing for the dims is if Kavanaugh gets voted into the SC. Otherwise, November is a blood bath imo.

I tend to agree, but we will know in 5 weeks.

The left radical fringe of the dims are also flipping some of their moderates to the republican side.

[PaceAdvantage]

If so,he doesn't have the temperment to be a justice.Whether that is true or not is immaterial in this instance, as those voting on him aren't likely to take this particular theory into consideration with this particular candidate...elections have consequences...as do foolish actions.

[3 hole tripp]

IMO for the most part what you state is misleading with no factual background. You clearly must be a fox news watcher.

[3 hole tripp]

When they talk about 2012 doctors notes, and yet do not produce these notes ... there is something to hide.

When the Senate democrats hired the lawyers for this accuser ... who must of wrote her responses, as they frequently grabbed a page and pointed to what she should read, most credibility is lost.

When Diane Feinstein says she didn't leak the letter and didn't ask her aides, and then an aide told her she already did ... she is getting too senile for her position and has to go.

When notes and inscriptions in a high school yearbook have relevance to a supreme court nomination, something is wrong with the process.

So I agree he has got to go ... to the Supreme Court :ThmbUp:

IMO for the most part what you state is misleading with no factual background. It is the right wing BS meant to influence with BS. You clearly must be a fox news watcher.

[Tom]

YO is which hole, now?
btw, which one did you crawl out of to get here?

13 posts and you are insulting long time members?

Classless - but I bet that is not the first time you have been told that.

I bet you are a democrat and watch SNL.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by barahona44 View Post
If so,he doesn't have the temperment to be a justice.

What temperment do you need to be a judge?
You listen to cases and discuss them. It's not like you have to sit and listen to empty-headed bottom feeding lyng POS democrats all day long.

[PaceAdvantage]

IMO for the most part what you state is misleading with no factual background. You clearly must be a fox news watcher.Oh wait, I forgot. Peter Strzok didn't allow his anti-Trump biases to interfere with his professional work, so I suppose Brett won't allow what the Dems tried to do to him affect his work either.

Good to know. Thanks for setting me straight. ;)

[Clocker]

IMO for the most part what you state is misleading with no factual background. It is the right wing BS meant to influence with BS. You clearly must be a fox news watcher.


IMO you failed to provide any details, analysis or proof of your assertions.

[Tom]

He IS a democrat!

[Clocker]

He IS a democrat!

Oh, yeah.

When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. :jump:

[davew]

IMO for the most part what you state is misleading with no factual background. It is the right wing BS meant to influence with BS. You clearly must be a fox news watcher.

Lionel Nation and Dan Bongino webcasts

you clearly must watch msnbc and cnn, as they did not state facts but just their opinions and call themselves news:pound:

[clicknow]

You guys better pray Kav doesn't get confirmed...if he wasn't against RvW before based on "stari decisis," maybe this whole nasty episode changes his mind...if only for revenge against those who sought to bury him. The monsters you create...

Food for thought.

Hopefully, you're not suggesting that there is anything in Kavanaugh's character that would lead him to doing anything like this. :confused:

Because if true, it would most definitely comprise a disqualifying attitudinal bias. The court is supposed to be non-partisan

Even suggesting that he might harbor these types of feelings, if you are on his side, is not a good innuendo to put out there.

Food for thought, indeed.

[cordoba]

Just another beer drunk.:puke:

[Show Me the Wire]

Hopefully, you're not suggesting that there is anything in Kavanaugh's character that would lead him to doing anything like this. :confused:

Because if true, it would most definitely comprise a disqualifying attitudinal bias. The court is supposed to be non-partisan

Even suggesting that he might harbor these types of feelings, if you are on his side, is not a good innuendo to put out there.

Food for thought, indeed.


P.A.'s reaction is to the application of justice. P.A. feels justice demands you deserve to be treated by how you treat other people.

Unless P.A. personally knows Kavanaugh, I don't think P.A. can suggest any hidden characteristics like you propose. Hey, P.A. do you personally know Kvanaugh?

[OntheRail]

You are not going to apply the Peter Strzok standard of capable doing job objectively, while holding bias opinions?

Why bother asking, I know the answer. NO.

As you know Racism and Bias are like DC current it has polarity and only flows in one direction... :coffee:

[Show Me the Wire]

As you know Racism and Bias are like DC current it has polarity and only flows in one direction... :coffee:

Truth.

[clicknow]

Unless P.A. personally knows Kavanaugh, I don't think P.A. can suggest any hidden characteristics like you propose.

And I was suggesting that he not suggest it.:) I do undersstand the difference between "knowing" and "speculation" by the way. ;) Using the word "if" twice in a sentence implies speculation.

As for knowing or not knowing Kavanaugh, going with your "personally knows" remark ......since nobody here DOES personally know Kavanaugh, then most every opinion here, for or against him, is just an exercise in speculation anyway.

Nobody here, including PA or myself or you, can suggest any hidden characteristics of the man, yet there's an entire topic where at least 3/4 of the posts are indeed, suggesting characteristics of both Kavanagh and Ford. :)

[Show Me the Wire]

Nobody here, including PA or myself or you, can suggest any hidden characteristics of the man, yet there's an entire topic where at least 3/4 of the posts are indeed, suggesting characteristics of both Kavanagh and Ford. :)

Through facts that have been presented by us, through the statements of people that personally know them and throuhg their own statements and not by pure speculation as you propose.

The deeper reason for my post, to you, is to highlight the reason why P.A. said what he said. I believe his statement is based in a visceral reaction to the abuse of the fundamental principles of justice and mercy.

[clicknow]

Through facts that have been presented by us, through the statements of people that personally know them and throuhg their own statements and not by pure speculation as you propose.



If there were THAT MANY facts, and they were corroborated beyond a reasonable doubt (not by a partisan committee) then there would be no reason for this topic at all. He would already be confirmed or not confirmed.

FACTS would be DNA evidence like we have today, and eye-witnesses who were IN the room where the alleged event took place, which in our modern world would now include smartphone videos and audios of the people involved.

All the statements of people that personally know them is speculation if they were not eye witnesses to the event.

Regardless of how this turns out, it will not ever entirely pass any true FACTS tests.

I keep an open mind about all this right now because I have female grandaughters, neices and such. If one of them came to me 10 or even 20 years from now and shared something that happened to her, I certainly would not say to them "oh shut up...if this actually happened to you, you would have told me about it years ago!"

I am not *sure* how i would advise them to proceed though. These are always very tricky incidences as we all know. I am not sure how I would advise them even before this Kavanaugh debacle happened.

If it were your daughter, how would you advise her? Esp. if she had no DNA proof, etc. like we have today?

I see on this and other forums, mostly politically-motivated responses. I like to discuss things from a "I'm in your shoes" POV.

So for me, regardless of how this turns out, I will never have a slam-dunk certainty about it, what really happened, or if it happened. Good for you if you can.

[Show Me the Wire]

If there were THAT MANY facts, and they were corroborated beyond a reasonable doubt (not by a partisan committee) then there would be no reason for this topic at all. He would already be confirmed or not confirmed.

FACTS would be DNA evidence like we have today, and eye-witnesses who were IN the room where the alleged event took place, which in our modern world would now include smartphone videos and audios of the people involved.

All the statements of people that personally know them is speculation if they were not eye witnesses to the event.

Regardless of how this turns out, it will not ever entirely pass any true FACTS tests.

I keep an open mind about all this right now because I have female grandaughters, neices and such. If one of them came to me 10 or even 20 years from now and shared something that happened to her, I certainly would not say to them "oh shut up...if this actually happened to you, you would have told me about it years ago!"

I am not *sure* how i would advise them to proceed though. These are always very tricky incidences as we all know. I am not sure how I would advise them even before this Kavanaugh debacle happened.

If it were your daughter, how would you advise her? Esp. if she had no DNA proof, etc. like we have today?

I see on this and other forums, mostly politically-motivated responses. I like to discuss things from a "I'm in your shoes" POV.

So for me, regardless of how this turns out, I will never have a slam-dunk certainty about it, what really happened, or if it happened. Good for you if you can.

So if you have reasonable doubt justice demands you don't continue to be accuse the accused of criminal behavior.

BTW my statements about personally knowing them goes to knowing the character of Ford and Kavanaugh, not the facts of the alleged incident.

Facts are established by eyewitnesses, as you stated. The facts as you state is they, the eyewitness said they were not an eyewitness to the party or event happening or that the eyewitness never personally met Kavanough with or without Ford. So you have corroborated fact established by eyewitnesses that this party or gathering never occurred. In other words this party or gathering never took place. You don't have to go into the facts of what took place at a non-existent event.

Without such a party or gathering occurring there is no possibility of Ford being assaulted at a non-existent event.

Justice for all demands Kavanaugh be believed and at the very least he should be shown mercy by the dem members like Ford had been by the repub members.

[zico20]

If there were THAT MANY facts, and they were corroborated beyond a reasonable doubt (not by a partisan committee) then there would be no reason for this topic at all. He would already be confirmed or not confirmed.

FACTS would be DNA evidence like we have today, and eye-witnesses who were IN the room where the alleged event took place, which in our modern world would now include smartphone videos and audios of the people involved.

All the statements of people that personally know them is speculation if they were not eye witnesses to the event.

Regardless of how this turns out, it will not ever entirely pass any true FACTS tests.

I keep an open mind about all this right now because I have female grandaughters, neices and such. If one of them came to me 10 or even 20 years from now and shared something that happened to her, I certainly would not say to them "oh shut up...if this actually happened to you, you would have told me about it years ago!"

I am not *sure* how i would advise them to proceed though. These are always very tricky incidences as we all know. I am not sure how I would advise them even before this Kavanaugh debacle happened.

If it were your daughter, how would you advise her? Esp. if she had no DNA proof, etc. like we have today?

I see on this and other forums, mostly politically-motivated responses. I like to discuss things from a "I'm in your shoes" POV.

So for me, regardless of how this turns out, I will never have a slam-dunk certainty about it, what really happened, or if it happened. Good for you if you can.

If you were a good father you would teach your daughters to stand up instantly and report it either to you or the police.

[clicknow]

If you were a good father you would teach your daughters to stand up instantly and report it either to you or the police.

I don't know how old you are, Zico, but things 20-30 years ago were quite different (I was in college as well as in the workplace both before and at the time). Anyone who says it wasn't is in denial or hasn't done their research. One only has to read the history of human resources, campus policies, and actual cases to know this.

DNA evidence wasn't even in use or available until 1986, and the first time it was used was in a court trial in Leicestershire, England.

How many years and how many accusations and depositions to get Bill Cosby? Has anyone counted? Answer: a LOT.

The term "sexual harassment" wasn't even coined until somewhere around 1976. I know. I was in the workplace before that, and have read carefully thru my human resources packettes. Look up all the court cases and workplace cases. It was considered an interpersonal problem to be worked out. (EEOC) issued guidelines in 1980 and it wasn't until after Anita Hill that the Supreme Court, in 1993 ruled that sexual harassment doesn't have to even seriously affect an employee’s psychological well-being in order to be unlawful.

So I will amend my statement to saying I don't know how I would have advised my daughter "back then". If my daughter had been Ford, for instance.




Today, with the many protections both women and men have in the workplace and in campus settings, things are quite different.

[Show Me the Wire]

Today, with the many protections both women and men have in the workplace and in campus settings, things are quite different.

Which is a good development. What has not changed is the concept of fairness under justice for all. Fairness dictates both parties must be treated the same under the same circumstances.

One party cannot be shown deference, while the other party is defiled when both parties are holding equal positions, under the circumstances.

[Clocker]

Fairness dictates both parties must be treated the same under the same circumstances.




Justice dictates that the parties be treated differently. The accused has the presumption of innocence, the accuser has the burden of proof.

Too many people who tried to insert themselves into this issue tried to shift the burden of proof to the accused.

[Show Me the Wire]

Justice dictates that the parties be treated differently. The accused has the presumption of innocence, the accuser has the burden of proof.

Too many people who tried to insert themselves into this issue tried to shift the burden of proof to the accused.

I am referring to proceedings outside of the judicial system.

In fairness to Ford she made these allegations outside of the judicial system, asking Feinstein for an investigation. Ford, on her own volition, did not publicly accuse Kavanaugh of a crime.

There is no judicial burden of proof in everyday life or outside of the judicial proceedings. In every day life we have the concept of justice for all and fairness in its application.

And yes the dems by trying to shift a non-existent burden of proof to Kavanaugh is a grave abuse of justice for all.

[Clocker]

In every day life we have the concept of justice for all and fairness in its application.



Horse hockey! :D

In everyday life people are biased and opinionated, often contrary to reality.

[Show Me the Wire]

Horse hockey! :D

In everyday life people are biased and opinionated, often contrary to reality.

Of course they are. However, the standard is justice for all. Everyone wants justice. What is revenge and why do people desire to have revenge.

When we don't meet the standard of justice for all, because of bias, we have problems.

[cordoba]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BvL5uLrXU

[letswastemoney]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BvL5uLrXU Multiple women are trying to destroy his life and reputation. Of course he's emotional.

At this point, I hope he's confirmed to stop the ugly precedent that a man can lose his job just by being accused alone. If the Republicans don't follow through and put Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, the Democrats will keep using this strategy to stop whoever they want from taking government positions.

Not every politician can be as strong as Trump in these situations.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

All I can say is, I like beer. Do you like beer?

[VigorsTheGrey]

All I can say is, I like beer. Do you like beer?

I like beer and I like kav...do you like beer and kav..?

[jimmyb]

Mitchell: “You fly fairly frequently for your hobbies and you’ve had to fly for your work. Is that true?”

Ford: “Correct. Unfortunately.”

Mitchell read from Ford’s curriculum vitae, pointing to hobbies she pursues including “surf travel.” Ford then confirmed she has flown to Hawaii, Coast Rica, South Pacific Islands and French Polynesia to surf.

“It’s easier for me to travel going that direction when it’s a vacation”
Ford said.

San Francisco to Tahiti is 8 hours and 20 minutes across the empty Pacific. That’s a long time in a cramped space with nowhere to land in case of mechanical problems. But, hey, it’s to surf in Tahiti!

[3 hole tripp]

Lambo,

Even it did happen, NOTHING in his adult life on the bench suggests he is not fully qualified.
unlike the liberal Justice-POS who tries to use foreign law instead of the constitution.

A REAL LIFE disgrace to the courts and real life DANGEROUS loose cannon. What could SPecial K possible do to be more of a problem that this other anti-American bottom feeder?

But the upside is that the dems have now lowered the bar for candidates for office, nominees, whatever. ANY liberal is now subject to intense scrutiny of yearbooks, writings, social media, yo name it. Wonder how THEY will live up to it? :pound::pound::pound:

OH, and of course we will be able to now reference unsigned letters received with no return addresses, as actual proof.

I bet we will find much more dirt on stinking liberals in college than they will find on righites.


I agree. We also now accept and understand that political candidates who go around "grabbing em by the pussy" or lie, mislead, deceive daily as well as spread their divisive and hateful rhetoric is now our standard bearer.

[3 hole tripp]

YO is which hole, now?
btw, which one did you crawl out of to get here?

13 posts and you are insulting long time members?

Classless - but I bet that is not the first time you have been told that.

I bet you are a democrat and watch SNL.

WTF difference does it make how many posts I have. Excuse me you self righteous one. Re read the posts, you are the one laying the personal attack behind a ****ing keyboard.

[ElKabong]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BvL5uLrXU

Word has it kavanaugh uses the middle urinal... He's a menace to society !

[ElKabong]

I agree. We also now accept and understand that political candidates who go around "grabbing em by the pussy" or lie, mislead, deceive daily as well as spread their divisive and hateful rhetoric is now our standard bearer.

You forgot, he also unscrews the tops of salt and pepper shakers at restaurants too.

[3 hole tripp]

YO is which hole, now?
btw, which one did you crawl out of to get here?

13 posts and you are insulting long time members?

Classless - but I bet that is not the first time you have been told that.

I bet you are a democrat and watch SNL.



Classless, you personally attacked and justified it by you being a long time user.
Nice forum. Right in line with the RIGHTS point of exclusionary views.

You do not know me and you do not know who I network with.

One last thing ... I am willing to wager on your "I bet you are a democrat" whine. We can easily prove this. What say You?

[3 hole tripp]

IMO you failed to provide any details, analysis or proof of your assertions.

WHAT? reread HIS post. He is the one stating his opinion on what he has witnessed. IMO I believe what he stated is misleading, from the first sentence to the last. It is similar to how the president deceives and misleads in an effort to influence stupid people.

So again IMO what he stated is misleading and not factual.

[3 hole tripp]

He IS a democrat!

Wrong Again. Wager $$

[3 hole tripp]

YO is which hole, now?
btw, which one did you crawl out of to get here?

13 posts and you are insulting long time members?

Classless - but I bet that is not the first time you have been told that.

I bet you are a democrat and watch SNL.

19 posts now. Am I a good guy yet?
I came off as a right wing conservative the number of posts would be irrelevant.

[Clydepuckett]

19 posts now. Am I a good guy yet?
I came off as a right wing conservative the number of posts would be irrelevant.

Well, glad we got that straight. You're not.

Continue.

[3 hole tripp]

Well, glad we got that straight. You're not.

Continue.

You have only 22 posts so you don't count either. Keep your mouth shut so you can be easily influenced and controlled.

[Tom]

You do not know me and you do not know who I network with.

Nor would I want to.:rolleyes:

[3 hole tripp]

Nor would I want to.:rolleyes:

Good and take your divisive, misleading, untrue rhetoric elsewhere. When called out don't personally attack, your credibility disappears.

I think I am over 20 posts now. Do I belong now?

[delayjf]

The problem with what you are saying is what if he is innocent (and there is no evidence that will hold up in court that he is guilty, which IS the standard of our legal system (innocent until PROVEN guilty)...

He's not even guilty based on The "preponderance of the evidence" standard.

[Tom]

Good and take your divisive, misleading, untrue rhetoric elsewhere. When called out don't personally attack, your credibility disappears.

I think I am over 20 posts now. Do I belong now?

Yes, you just an honored place on my IGNORE List - for people who have ZERO to offer.

[PaceAdvantage]

WTF difference does it make how many posts I have. Excuse me you self righteous one. Re read the posts, you are the one laying the personal attack behind a ****ing keyboard.I believe you started with your condescending reply to davew.

Regardless, Tom has a point (because he's a righty, of course :rolleyes:). You don't just storm into someone's room and start shitting all over the floor.

Get the lay of the land first. Play nice before you start hurling tomatoes.

If you owned a store, would you treat long term customers a little better than a guy you've never seen before? Of course you would...politics wouldn't play any role in that natural action.

I suggest you calm the F down.

[upthecreek]

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1047211950936088576

[boxcar]

I like beer and I like kav...do you like beer and kav..?

I like Kav because he likes beer like I do. :coffee:

[boxcar]

Nor would I want to.:rolleyes:

He's probably a card-carrying Dimwit Underground comrade who lost his way to here.

[Tom]

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1047211950936088576

EVERY woman has the right to be heard, right hcap? Ely?

:lol::lol::lol:

[3 hole tripp]

Lionel Nation and Dan Bongino webcasts

you clearly must watch msnbc and cnn, as they did not state facts but just their opinions and call themselves news:pound:

FOX NEWS LIES and is strictly entertainment. They admitted this. We know the President is their unpaid whore, we know the President lies and deceives daily meaning they are a match made in heaven.

[3 hole tripp]

What a load of crap.

I actually scored him on body language using my DVR.

Once upon a time I was certified to do interrogations and interviews.

He scored truthful 32-4 on my scale.

Take that for what it’s worth.

If you’re a Dem you should be ashamed........

What difference does it make what political side of the aisle you sit. Every American should ask for and demand a complete and thorough investigation. Exactly what we would relentlessly advocate for if you, I or members of our family stand accused or is victimized. Pretyy simple!

[3 hole tripp]

I believe you started with your condescending reply to davew.

Regardless, Tom has a point (because he's a righty, of course :rolleyes:). You don't just storm into someone's room and start shitting all over the floor.

Get the lay of the land first. Play nice before you start hurling tomatoes.

If you owned a store, would you treat long term customers a little better than a guy you've never seen before? Of course you would...politics wouldn't play any role in that natural action.

I suggest you calm the F down.

So this is a closed store with closed minds. I have been a registered user since 2010. I know the lay of this land. He personally attacked a user who posted on this forum, quickly labeled without any knowledge and proof and you now are scolding me. STFU

[3 hole tripp]

I believe you started with your condescending reply to davew.

Regardless, Tom has a point (because he's a righty, of course :rolleyes:). You don't just storm into someone's room and start shitting all over the floor.

Get the lay of the land first. Play nice before you start hurling tomatoes.

If you owned a store, would you treat long term customers a little better than a guy you've never seen before? Of course you would...politics wouldn't play any role in that natural action.

I suggest you calm the F down.

No I shared my opinion and stated as such. His statements were misleading deceiving and not true. He responds with a personal attack and claims to know me and my political affiliation and views. Go ****ing whine to him.

[woodtoo]

No I shared my opinion and stated as such. His statements were misleading deceiving and not true. He responds with a personal attack and claims to know me and my political affiliation and views. Go ****ing whine to him.

You're world is about to fall apart. How GLORIOUS for us.:jump::jump::jump:

[3 hole tripp]

You're world is about to fall apart. How GLORIOUS for us.:jump::jump::jump:

Its all good. Thanks for thinking about me.

[3 hole tripp]

You're world is about to fall apart. How GLORIOUS for us.:jump::jump::jump:

Division? Hate? Bigotry? Misogyny?
You have similar character traits as many others on this forum, not surprised being that you support the unpaid whore from Fox News!

[3 hole tripp]

He's probably a card-carrying Dimwit Underground comrade who lost his way to here.

Division? Hate? Bigotry? Misogyny?

You have similar character traits as many others on this forum, not surprised being that you support the unpaid whore from Fox News!

[ReplayRandall]

So this is a closed store with closed minds. I have been a registered user since 2010. I know the lay of this land. He personally attacked a user who posted on this forum, quickly labeled without any knowledge and proof and you now are scolding me. STFU

No I shared my opinion and stated as such. His statements were misleading deceiving and not true. He responds with a personal attack and claims to know me and my political affiliation and views. Go ****ing whine to him.

Today's scenario for 3 hole Tripp:

1. PA Mike will take his time, letting you think it's OK to address him this way.

2. Mike will then slowly respond to you, like a cat playing with his prey.

3. Mike will quickly tire of your worthless rhetoric and jettison your ass off the site.

[3 hole tripp]

Today's scenario for 3 hole Tripp:

1. PA Mike will take his time, letting you think it's OK to address him this way.

2. Mike will then slowly respond to you, like a cat playing with his prey.

3. Mike will quickly tire of your worthless rhetoric and jettison your ass off the site.

I am not surprised at this post at all. If one doesn't think like you, then one doesn't belong here. All about EXCLUSION!
This is growth? You guys live under a rock.

A cat playing with his prey, really tough guy. Bring it on!
I have been in countless fights advocating for the rights of others and I am in no way intimidated.

I love it, if a user doesn't agree, if a user stands up and confronts, we kick him out. Please do .....

[3 hole tripp]

EVERY woman has the right to be heard, right hcap? Ely?

:lol::lol::lol:


I would love to be able to SMELL that letter.
I bet it was once wrapped around a dead fish.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?

[PaceAdvantage]

What difference does it make what political side of the aisle you sit. Every American should ask for and demand a complete and thorough investigation.Any rational person would look at what has occurred and agree that's exactly what we are getting. A complete and thorough investigation.

Hours upon hours of testimony before Congress.
Initial background checks.
TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.
Accuser testifies before Congress.
FBI investigates again.

But still not satisfied?

****ing comical...again.

[PaceAdvantage]

I love it, if a user doesn't agree, if a user stands up and confronts, we kick him out. Please do .....lulz

[3 hole tripp]

Any rational person would look at what has occurred and agree that's exactly what we are getting. A complete and thorough investigation.

Hours upon hours of testimony before Congress.
Initial background checks.
TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.
Accuser testifies before Congress.
FBI investigates again.

But still not satisfied?

****ing comical...again.

I disagree. You must interview all including the alleged perpetrator and victim.
You must look to corroborate that information. From the info I have this has not been done.
You must exhaust all effort to prove one's innocence as well as guilt.

IMO the FIX is in. The American people earn what they get. I think the American people are starting to smarten up. We shall see.

[3 hole tripp]

lulz

laugh at your own expense. I have enough in my life

[3 hole tripp]

Any rational person would look at what has occurred and agree that's exactly what we are getting. A complete and thorough investigation.

Hours upon hours of testimony before Congress.
Initial background checks.
TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.
Accuser testifies before Congress.
FBI investigates again.

But still not satisfied?

****ing comical...again.

Why quickly come out and state that the investigation will be time sensitive and limited in scope? Why bother? This is not a complete and thorough investigation. Time should not matter if the facts do!

[Show Me the Wire]

I disagree. You must interview all including the alleged perpetrator and victim.
You must look to corroborate that information. From the info I have this has not been done.
You must exhaust all effort to prove one's innocence as well as guilt.

IMO the FIX is in. The American people earn what they get. I think the American people are starting to smarten up. We shall see.

Why should the alleged victim be interviewed. Are you suggesting her testimony under oath may change?

Explain to us the justice in allowing a alleged victim who already testified under oath be re-interviewed regarding the accusations she made under oath at a senate hearing?

[woodtoo]

Why quickly come out and state that the investigation will be time sensitive and limited in scope? Why bother? This is not a complete and thorough investigation. Time should not matter if the facts do!

People have tired of their "all in" delay, delay tactics. I'm as surprised as you are that the Repugs have taken POTUS lead, and have grown some gonads.

It will serve them well.:ThmbUp:

[3 hole tripp]

Any rational person would look at what has occurred and agree that's exactly what we are getting. A complete and thorough investigation.

Hours upon hours of testimony before Congress.
Initial background checks.
TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.
Accuser testifies before Congress.
FBI investigates again.

But still not satisfied?

****ing comical...again.

TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.

This statement is far from the truth. Just prior to the hearing less than 10% were released. As the hearing went on, and after relentless pursuit from committee senate members, more info come forward. The question is and should be why? Why not release all documents in a proper and timely manner. What motivates anything less?

[Show Me the Wire]

Why quickly come out and state that the investigation will be time sensitive and limited in scope? Why bother? This is not a complete and thorough investigation. Time should not matter if the facts do!


Isn't that what the D senators agreed to with Flake? Flake specifically stated he supported the D's and thought it would be appropriate for a supplemental investigation, limited in time and scope. Is it too much to expect the D's stick to the compromise they made with Flake?

[PaceAdvantage]

TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.

This statement is far from the truth. Just prior to the hearing less than 10% were released. As the hearing went on, and after relentless pursuit from committee senate members, more info come forward. The question is and should be why? Why not release all documents in a proper and timely manner. What motivates anything less?They had already released more documents compared to any other SC nominee.

But you're right. This should immediately disqualify him.

Get him out of there, and tell him to take Trump with him.

Only then can the USA get itself out of the total economic mess it finds itself in at the moment.

The people can't take anymore pain.

[Show Me the Wire]

TONS more documents demanded and released compared to any prior nominee.

This statement is far from the truth. Just prior to the hearing less than 10% were released. As the hearing went on, and after relentless pursuit from committee senate members, more info come forward. The question is and should be why? Why not release all documents in a proper and timely manner. What motivates anything less?

Does not preclude the 10% released exceeds the total amount of documents released for any prior nominee.

[PaceAdvantage]

It's never enough for these guys.

Never enough documents. Never enough investigation.

At least never enough until desired outcome is achieved.

****ing comical.

[3 hole tripp]

People have tired of their "all in" delay, delay tactics. I'm as surprised as you are that the Repugs have taken POTUS lead, and have grown some gonads.

It will serve them well.:ThmbUp:

I think it is the other way around. Once again they refuse to stand up to the master.
I don't care how long it takes to establish FACTS and insure the right man or woman gets the appointment.

Right now we got shit and the shitgibbon went out on the trail and victimized the victim once again, without the investigation being complete. Most users on this forum are OK with this. I am willing to bet if it were their daughter they would have a different position. Funny how that works, huh!

[PaceAdvantage]

Blah blah blah blah..."if she was your daughter..."

How about if Kavanaugh were your son? And you saw how hard he worked all his life to achieve what he as achieved, only to have someone come along and tear it all down with a story that has more holes in it than Swiss cheese?

Yes, we're automatically supposed to believe her because she is female. Women never lie. Women never get their facts wrong.

Only men lie and get their facts wrong.

I get it.

What if Kavanaugh were your son?

[3 hole tripp]

It's never enough for these guys.

Never enough documents. Never enough investigation.

At least never enough until desired outcome is achieved.

****ing comical.

It is not enough if the investigation is flawed and incomplete. It is never enough for the shitgibbon to go out and publicly humiliate women. To re victimize an alleged victim with no knowledge of a completed investigation based on FACTS. Seems to me the fix is in. If there is nothing to hide, roll over play dead and allow the peoples work to be done. If he is not guilty he becomes an instant national hero....

[PaceAdvantage]

If the fix is in, you must not have much faith in the Mueller investigation...same justice department, no?

Funny how you can claim one thing and not the other. Mueller investigation legit, FBI investigation into Ford allegations is fixed.

Again, ****ING COMICAL.

[Show Me the Wire]

I think it is the other way around. Once again they refuse to stand up to the master.
I don't care how long it takes to establish FACTS and insure the right man or woman gets the appointment.

Right now we got shit and the shitgibbon went out on the trail and victimized the victim once again, without the investigation being complete. Most users on this forum are OK with this. I am willing to bet if it were their daughter they would have a different position. Funny how that works, huh!

Ford was granted a hearing on based on unsubstantiated criminal accusations, based on the fact a particular party or get together occurring. The occurrence of this specific party or get together, Ford alleged occurred, had been refuted by Ford's own named witnesses prior to Ford's testimony under oath. Yet the senate judiciary committee allowed Ford to give testimony.

The facts prior to her testimony demonstrated, the foundation event, as Ford alleges did not occur. Ford received more rights than any other person would have received.

So how does a non-event impact the appointment?

[3 hole tripp]

Why should the alleged victim be interviewed. Are you suggesting her testimony under oath may change?

Explain to us the justice in allowing a alleged victim who already testified under oath be re-interviewed regarding the accusations she made under oath at a senate hearing?

Yes I am suggesting that the alleged perpetrator or victims testimony could change. Who has more reason to LIE?
Explain the justice in not interviewing her and the judge and then corroborating their statements. Is someone lying?

[PaceAdvantage]

Who has more reason to LIE?Great question. Especially after a gofundme account appears and the accuser makes over half-million dollars in no time flat.

Maybe the FBI should investigate where the biggest donations to those accounts came from...

Forget the FBI, at the very least, maybe one of our esteemed "4th estate" grand media empires will do an inquiry...maybe they will investigate where all the money came from? To ensure nothing shady went down.

Nah...they probably blew all their budgets researching old tax evasion schemes by the Trump organization...

Lulz

[elysiantraveller]

Great question. Especially after a gofundme account appears and the accuser makes over half-million dollars in no time flat.

Maybe the FBI should investigate where the biggest donations to those accounts came from...

Or maybe just our 4th estate grand media empires...maybe they will investigate where all the money came from? To ensure nothing shady went down.

Nah...they probably blew all their budgets researching old tax evasion schemes by the Trump organization...

Lulz

Pity they can't just buy some furnaces from a family member's business and jack the invoices up 30% to pocket the excess cash.

:pound::pound::pound::pound:

Lulz

Sad!

[3 hole tripp]

Ford was granted a hearing on based on unsubstantiated criminal accusations, based on the fact a particular party or get together occurring. The occurrence of this specific party or get together, Ford alleged occurred, had been refuted by Ford's own named witnesses prior to Ford's testimony under oath. Yet the senate judiciary committee allowed Ford to give testimony.

The facts prior to her testimony demonstrated, the foundation event, as Ford alleges did not occur. Ford received more rights than any other person would have received.

So how does a non-event impact the appointment?

Absolutely incorrect! Where do you get your info from?
Unsubstantiated?
No what we see is info restricted, compromised, withheld and delayed. Why would this be done if the info or accusation was unsubstantiated. Did you father not teach you that one needs to be motivated to act!

[PaceAdvantage]

Pity they can't just buy some furnaces from a family member's business and jack the invoices up 30% to pocket the excess cash.

:pound::pound::pound::pound:

LulzLULZ

I win. Red rules.

[3 hole tripp]

Great question. Especially after a gofundme account appears and the accuser makes over half-million dollars in no time flat.

Maybe the FBI should investigate where the biggest donations to those accounts came from...

Forget the FBI, at the very least, maybe one of our esteemed "4th estate" grand media empires will do an inquiry...maybe they will investigate where all the money came from? To ensure nothing shady went down.

Nah...they probably blew all their budgets researching old tax evasion schemes by the Trump organization...

Lulz


With that tolerant, controlled, non bias behavior under pressure... I vote for the Judge. He lying, or he hiding something.
He wants this so bad and so does the shitgibbon. Maybe Judge K's position on whether a sitting President can be indicted is a motivating factor. No, no way!

[Show Me the Wire]

Yes I am suggesting that the alleged perpetrator or victims testimony could change. Who has more reason to LIE?

The FBI should interview both the alleged perpetrator and victim. This is where it should all start. The foundation. To begin with IMO, the information obtained at the hearing was not complete. In the FBI interview you use what you have obtained, develop and compare that to the testimony under oath, and begin to corroborate through a thorough interview of every named witness. Once interviews are complete the info secured would influence where to go next.

Changing your story after giving sworn testimony is perjury. Remember she swore to tell the truth. In this case I say Ford, because no witness corroborated Ford's claim of this party occurring.

She said a specific party happened and specific people were present. How many bites at the apple does she get for a she said, they said story?

It is a she said they said, because the theys' disagree with Ford. The specific people she identified all have denied being present at this party or that such a party took place.

[upthecreek]

https://twitter.com/WashTimes/status/1047495497051766784

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh, that Rasmussen...nothing but a Trump propaganda outlet...don't believe a word.

(How am I doing 3 hole?)

[Show Me the Wire]

Absolutely incorrect! Where do you get your info from?
Unsubstantiated?
No what we see is info restricted, compromised, withheld and delayed. Why would this be done if the info or accusation was unsubstantiated. Did you father not teach you that one needs to be motivated to act!

From the hearing.

Do you know what unsubstantiated means?
un·sub·stan·ti·at·ed
ˌənsəbˈstan(t)SHēˌādəd/Submit
adjective
not supported or proven by evidence.


Are you saying Ford's named eyewitness support her story about being at a party with her and Kavanaugh? Where is the factual basis for your assertion that her claims are substantiated? Is your claim based solely on her testimony that a party happened?

[3 hole tripp]

Blah blah blah blah..."if she was your daughter..."

How about if Kavanaugh were your son? And you saw how hard he worked all his life to achieve what he as achieved, only to have someone come along and tear it all down with a story that has more holes in it than Swiss cheese?

Yes, we're automatically supposed to believe her because she is female. Women never lie. Women never get their facts wrong.

Only men lie and get their facts wrong.

I get it.

What if Kavanaugh were your son?


This is why we need a complete and thorough investigation. I am a victim of sexual assault. I have never come out and never will.
I remember the perpetrator, I remember his name, what he looks like and where he lives today. When a alleged victim comes out WILL NEVER prove whether the allegation is true or not. What would motivate another to come out, lay those claims, and subject themselves to this shit. She certainly is well off and doesn't need to profit. The Judge's interests should be protected as well. If I was in his shoes and not guilty I would've laid over played dead from day 1. Investigate all you need, look at whatever documents you need. I am an outstanding judge and citizen and those documents, the interviews will prove it. We got the exact opposite. So what do we believe? Without a complete, thorough, independent investigation welcomed with open arms by all parties we will never ever know. All I want is the truth. We teach our children from day 1 ... live, speak, and search the truth, live and hang with credibility. We are from from it today with our elected officials at our expense.

[3 hole tripp]

If the fix is in, you must not have much faith in the Mueller investigation...same justice department, no?

Funny how you can claim one thing and not the other. Mueller investigation legit, FBI investigation into Ford allegations is fixed.

Again, ****ING COMICAL.

****ING COMICAL

No I am referring the Kavanaugh appointment. Without a complete investigation a flawed candidate gets appointed. With the unpaid whore out on the campaign train re victimizing the victim without the investigation complete tells me something!

[3 hole tripp]

From the hearing.

Do you know what unsubstantiated means?
un·sub·stan·ti·at·ed
ˌənsəbˈstan(t)SHēˌādəd/Submit
adjective
not supported or proven by evidence.


Are you saying Ford's named eyewitness support her story about being at a party with her and Kavanaugh? Where is the factual basis for your assertion that her claims are substantiated? Is your claim based solely on her testimony that a party happened?

No I dont know what unsubstantiated means
please explain this to me .. you ****ing hillbillies, really

this is all you got

[Show Me the Wire]

This is why we need a complete and thorough investigation. I am a victim of sexual assault. I have never come out and never will.
I remember the perpetrator, I remember his name, what he looks like and where he lives today. When a alleged victim comes out WILL NEVER prove whether the allegation is true or not. What would motivate another to come out, lay those claims, and subject themselves to this shit. She certainly is well off and doesn't need to profit. The Judge's interests should be protected as well. If I was in his shoes and not guilty I would've laid over played dead from day 1. Investigate all you need, look at whatever documents you need. I am an outstanding judge and citizen and those documents, the interviews will prove it. We got the exact opposite. So what do we believe? Without a complete, thorough, independent investigation welcomed with open arms by all parties we will never ever know. All I want is the truth. We teach our children from day 1 ... live, speak, and search the truth, live and hang with credibility. We are from from it today with our elected officials at our expense.

I am not speaking to your experience. I tend to believe if you remember the the important details too, such as the date, the place and who was present. Also you have my sympathy, especially since it seems you did not receive justice.

Ford is claiming she attended a specific party with specific people and at this party she was sexually assaulted. We can restate her claim as follows. I was sexually assaulted because I attended a party with specific people. The foundation of her claim is built on this party occurring.

Can we agree if she never attended the party Ford would not have been molested by an attendee of the party?

[3 hole tripp]

No I dont know what unsubstantiated means
please explain this to me .. you ****ing hillbillies, really

this is all you got

She stated with 100% fact that the liar Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, with another man in the room. (Mark Judge). If the FBI does a complete and thorough investigation her position may be SUBSTANTIATED. If the FBI interviews the liar Kavanaugh and Judge, her story may be substantiated.

Get it now.

[PaceAdvantage]

This is why we need a complete and thorough investigation. I am a victim of sexual assault. I have never come out and never will.
I remember the perpetrator, I remember his name, what he looks like and where he lives today. When a alleged victim comes out WILL NEVER prove whether the allegation is true or not. What would motivate another to come out, lay those claims, and subject themselves to this shit. She certainly is well off and doesn't need to profit. The Judge's interests should be protected as well. If I was in his shoes and not guilty I would've laid over played dead from day 1. Investigate all you need, look at whatever documents you need. I am an outstanding judge and citizen and those documents, the interviews will prove it. We got the exact opposite. So what do we believe? Without a complete, thorough, independent investigation welcomed with open arms by all parties we will never ever know. All I want is the truth. We teach our children from day 1 ... live, speak, and search the truth, live and hang with credibility. We are from from it today with our elected officials at our expense.You lay all this out as if it is out of some sort of rule book.

Where does it say exactly how Kavanaugh should or should not have acted in response? Everyone is different, remember? Everyone doesn't react the same. Being outraged at outrageous accusations (if you know they are false) doesn't strike me as particularly guilty behavior. Yet you proclaim that it is.

OK, your opinion and you have an absolute right to that. But don't try and pass it off as some sort of settled science lie detector.

And as for Ms. Ford being automatically believable just for the fact that she went public...please...that doesn't prove or disprove a thing. Motivations ABOUND for doing such things. From publicity hound, to mental illness, to payoffs, to complete devotion to the ideological cause, to TELLING THE TRUTH (yes, this is valid, and she certainly may be telling the truth).

But to automatically say she is telling the truth, and not only the truth as she sees it, but the iron-clad truth as it sits in reality, simply because she came out and told her story, is the height of absurdity.

We should get rid of the court system if that were the case. Or at least stop clogging up the system with sexually related offenses against women. After all, if you're a woman, and you come out with your story, that's it. Game over.

No need for another trial.

[PaceAdvantage]

No I dont know what unsubstantiated means
please explain this to me .. you ****ing hillbillies, really

this is all you gotThere's a red card.

[Show Me the Wire]

No I dont know what unsubstantiated means
please explain this to me .. you ****ing hillbillies, really

this is all you got

Apparently you don't. You accused this hillybilly of using a word I didn't understand. Demonstrating my understanding of the word, I asked you were is the evidence for your assertion that Ford's claim is substantiated, based on the hearing. Well where is your evidence that the accusations are substantiated?

[PaceAdvantage]

No I dont know what unsubstantiated means
please explain this to me .. you ****ing hillbillies, really

this is all you gotFunny. He doesn't sound like a hillbilly to me.

[elysiantraveller]

Funny. He doesn't sound like a hillbilly to me.

Hillbilly's vote for Trump.

[PaceAdvantage]

Hillbilly's vote for Trump.Good little shill.

[3 hole tripp]

I am not speaking to your experience. I tend to believe if you remember the the important details too, such as the date, the place and who was present. Also you have my sympathy, especially since it seems you did not receive justice.

Ford is claiming she attended a specific party with specific people and at this party she was sexually assaulted. We can restate her claim as follows. I was sexually assaulted because I attended a party with specific people. The foundation of her claim is built on this party occurring.

Can we agree if she never attended the party Ford would not have been molested by an attendee of the party?

I was young and dumb and fell for the underage night out of drinking with a older co worker. The rest is history. I do remember the location. I do not remember the date and time. Like I said earlier I will never ever forget who did this. So from my end and as I said to my wife, her position IMO weakens if she can't remember where it happened. I struggle with this. I am all in on the fact that she is 100% sure it was Brett Kavanaugh. The date and time well I don't remember. For those who think victims are not legit because they did not come forward right away or even at all is so wrong.

If she never attended the party then her story lacks credibility. What would then be troubling is her motivation. I can't see her coming out if it did not happen. For a huge pay day maybe? If that is the case we the middle class American are in big trouble.

[elysiantraveller]

Good little shill.

Haha...

I mean its not really open for debate.

He didn't cruise to victory with the overwhelming urban turnout he generated.

I could say he did remarkably great in cross burning country. Would that be better? :eek::eek:

[PaceAdvantage]

Haha...

I mean its not really open for debate.

He didn't cruise to victory with the overwhelming urban turnout he generated.

I could say he did remarkably great in cross burning country. Would that be better? :eek::eek:Are you getting this from Hillary's interview the other day. Because you sound just like her.

Like I said...good little shill.

[Show Me the Wire]

She stated with 100% fact that the liar Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, with another man in the room. (Mark Judge). If the FBI does a complete and thorough investigation her position may be SUBSTANTIATED. If the FBI interviews the liar Kavanaugh and Judge, her story may be substantiated.

Get it now.

Sorry, didn't see this before my last post. Again, Ford testified under oath and already named the eyewitnesses. There is no need to question her again about her allegations.

Third parties need to be questioned to make sure their stories have not changed. Meaning the eyewitnesses that refute her base allegation about a social gathering taking place, need to be interviewed again. And that is what the FBI is doing.

[PaceAdvantage]

For a huge pay day maybe? If that is the case we the middle class American are in big trouble.We've been in trouble for the longest of times.

It's how Trump got elected in the first place.

[elysiantraveller]

Are you getting this from Hillary's interview the other day. Because you sound just like her.

Like I said...good little shill.

No.

Election results are public information.

[Show Me the Wire]

I was young and dumb and fell for the underage night out of drinking with a older co worker. The rest is history. I do remember the location. I do not remember the date and time. Like I said earlier I will never ever forget who did this. So from my end and as I said to my wife, her position IMO weakens if she can't remember where it happened. I struggle with this. I am all in on the fact that she is 100% sure it was Brett Kavanaugh. The date and time well I don't remember. For those who think victims are not legit because they did not come forward right away or even at all is so wrong.

If she never attended the party then her story lacks credibility. What would then be troubling is her motivation. I can't see her coming out if it did not happen. For a huge pay day maybe? If that is the case we the middle class American are in big trouble.

So we agree Ford factually attending that specific party is crucial to her claim that she was sexually assaulted by an attendee, Kavanaugh.

[3 hole tripp]

Funny. He doesn't sound like a hillbilly to me.

Shouldn't others get infractions as well. I think this forum is disparate in their treatment of its users. I am thinking the forum as a bias lean to it and I am not surprised.

[3 hole tripp]

So we agree Ford factually attending that specific party is crucial to her claim that she was sexually assaulted by an attendee, Kavanaugh.

NO , the investigation needs to be completed so that position can be corroborated. We agree that Ford claims Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her with Judge in the room. We also now know that Kavanaugh lied under oath.

[3 hole tripp]

I am not speaking to your experience. I tend to believe if you remember the the important details too, such as the date, the place and who was present. Also you have my sympathy, especially since it seems you did not receive justice.

Ford is claiming she attended a specific party with specific people and at this party she was sexually assaulted. We can restate her claim as follows. I was sexually assaulted because I attended a party with specific people. The foundation of her claim is built on this party occurring.

Can we agree if she never attended the party Ford would not have been molested by an attendee of the party?

WRONG. The foundation of her claim is that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her with Mark Judge in the room.

[PaceAdvantage]

Shouldn't others get infractions as well. I think this forum is disparate in their treatment of its users. I am thinking the forum as a bias lean to it and I am not surprised.Plenty of others have. Including those you would label a ****ing hillbilly.

[3 hole tripp]

You lay all this out as if it is out of some sort of rule book.

Where does it say exactly how Kavanaugh should or should not have acted in response? Everyone is different, remember? Everyone doesn't react the same. Being outraged at outrageous accusations (if you know they are false) doesn't strike me as particularly guilty behavior. Yet you proclaim that it is.

OK, your opinion and you have an absolute right to that. But don't try and pass it off as some sort of settled science lie detector.

And as for Ms. Ford being automatically believable just for the fact that she went public...please...that doesn't prove or disprove a thing. Motivations ABOUND for doing such things. From publicity hound, to mental illness, to payoffs, to complete devotion to the ideological cause, to TELLING THE TRUTH (yes, this is valid, and she certainly may be telling the truth).

But to automatically say she is telling the truth, and not only the truth as she sees it, but the iron-clad truth as it sits in reality, simply because she came out and told her story, is the height of absurdity.

We should get rid of the court system if that were the case. Or at least stop clogging up the system with sexually related offenses against women. After all, if you're a woman, and you come out with your story, that's it. Game over.

No need for another trial.

In finding just cause there is a rule book or standard to follow. This is as basic as it gets. There is a reason why there is not a complete and thorough investigation. That is it. Time doesn't matter, political beliefs don't matter, hate, division and bigotry don't matter. All that matters is the FACTS and IMO Kavanaugh and those that support him have denied access to the facts from the start. Again if I had nothing to hide, I am as pristine as others have made me out to be and I really want this job like he does, I roll over and allow access. I willingly call for an investigation from day 1.

[3 hole tripp]

Plenty of others have. Including those you would label a ****ing hillbilly.

Lets hope you nailed the guy who personally attacked me, challenging my intellect. Please explain the difference.

[PaceAdvantage]

Sigh.

These offenses are for blatant and rude name calling. Not challenges to intellect. And not for subjective claims of "personal attack."

[Show Me the Wire]

NO , the investigation needs to be completed so that position can be corroborated. We agree that Ford claims Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her with Judge in the room. We also now know that Kavanaugh lied under oath.

A room during a specific party attended by specific people. If Ford's claim is Kavanaugh sexually assaulted me sometime in my life in some room and some unknown location, the whole claim is farcical and a complete abuse of fairness at justice.

The only reason Fords' claim was given any credence is the fact she a specific party occurred and there specific people who knew about and attended the party. She did not allege all the people witnessed the assault, but they were witnesses to the party occurring.

The party is the opportunity, which allowed Kavanaugh to assault Ford. Without the alleged opportunity Kavanuagh could not have assaulted Ford as she specifically claims.

Once again Ford's base claim is I was assaulted, because I attended a specific party with specific people. Without her attending the party Kavanaugh, it is impossible for Kavanaugh or anyone else to assault her at she alleges.

For your sake I hope nobody ever accuses you of some criminal accusation, based on the fact it could have happened sometime during the accuser's life and the accuser doesn't remember when or where.

[boxcar]

In finding just cause there is a rule book or standard to follow. This is as basic as it gets. There is a reason why there is not a complete and thorough investigation. That is it. Time doesn't matter, political beliefs don't matter, hate, division and bigotry don't matter. All that matters is the FACTS and IMO Kavanaugh and those that support him have denied access to the facts from the start. Again if I had nothing to hide, I am as pristine as others have made me out to be and I really want this job like he does, I roll over and allow access. I willingly call for an investigation from day 1.

Yeah, there is a reason there won't be " complete and thorough investigation" (translate: years in the making which libs would love :rolleyes: ) is because according to the expert sex crimes prosecutor the ratio of Ford's noise to signal was so exceedingly high, the prosecutor couldn't find any signal. In other words, there's nothing credible to really investigate. Ford's testimony was phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock 'n' roll nothingburger.

[Tom]

Breaking News.
FBI has found the house where the party took place.
They released this photo of the bathroom Ford was looking for.

[PaceAdvantage]

Breaking News.
FBI has found the house where the party took place.
They released this photo of the bathroom Ford was looking for.Stuff like this isn't funny. Just sayin'

I'm at least sane enough to realize Ford might actually be telling the truth. We'll probably never know either way because she and the Democrats decided until the last minute to release her accusation to the Senate, but that's on them.

[boxcar]

Breaking News.
FBI has found the house where the party took place.
They released this photo of the bathroom Ford was looking for.

Wow! That bathroom is in need of a radical makeover. :coffee:

[Show Me the Wire]

WRONG. The foundation of her claim is that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her with Mark Judge in the room.

To summarize my earlier post. An assault cannot not take place without an opportunity. Per your experience you gave your predator an opportunity by drinking to excess. Without opportunity for the act, it is impossible to for the act to take place.

[Tom]

Stuff like this isn't funny. Just sayin'

I'm at least sane enough to realize Ford might actually be telling the truth. We'll probably never know either way because she and the Democrats decided until the last minute to release her accusation to the Senate, but that's on them.

Not aimed at Ford, but at our newest Eintstein.
Take it down if you want to.

[VigorsTheGrey]

You lay all this out as if it is out of some sort of rule book.

Where does it say exactly how Kavanaugh should or should not have acted in response? Everyone is different, remember? Everyone doesn't react the same. Being outraged at outrageous accusations (if you know they are false) doesn't strike me as particularly guilty behavior. Yet you proclaim that it is.

OK, your opinion and you have an absolute right to that. But don't try and pass it off as some sort of settled science lie detector.

And as for Ms. Ford being automatically believable just for the fact that she went public...please...that doesn't prove or disprove a thing. Motivations ABOUND for doing such things. From publicity hound, to mental illness, to payoffs, to complete devotion to the ideological cause, to TELLING THE TRUTH (yes, this is valid, and she certainly may be telling the truth).

But to automatically say she is telling the truth, and not only the truth as she sees it, but the iron-clad truth as it sits in reality, simply because she came out and told her story, is the height of absurdity.

We should get rid of the court system if that were the case. Or at least stop clogging up the system with sexually related offenses against women. After all, if you're a woman, and you come out with your story, that's it. Game over.

No need for another trial.

Exactly. Good post..:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[Buckeye]

That's an interesting opening argument . . .

Hey hey, hey ho, the US Constitution has got to go.

Starting with the 6th Amendment.

I'm not a lawyer, but I did study the law somewhere in West Philadelphia.

[3 hole tripp]

A room during a specific party attended by specific people. If Ford's claim is Kavanaugh sexually assaulted me sometime in my life in some room and some unknown location, the whole claim is farcical and a complete abuse of fairness at justice.

The only reason Fords' claim was given any credence is the fact she a specific party occurred and there specific people who knew about and attended the party. She did not allege all the people witnessed the assault, but they were witnesses to the party occurring.

The party is the opportunity, which allowed Kavanaugh to assault Ford. Without the alleged opportunity Kavanuagh could not have assaulted Ford as she specifically claims.

Once again Ford's base claim is I was assaulted, because I attended a specific party with specific people. Without her attending the party Kavanaugh, it is impossible for Kavanaugh or anyone else to assault her at she alleges.

For your sake I hope nobody ever accuses you of some criminal accusation, based on the fact it could have happened sometime during the accuser's life and the accuser doesn't remember when or where.

Then get out of the way and support a complete investigation. This is limited and restricted. Everything else is BS.

[3 hole tripp]

Yeah, there is a reason there won't be " complete and thorough investigation" (translate: years in the making which libs would love :rolleyes: ) is because according to the expert sex crimes prosecutor the ratio of Ford's noise to signal was so exceedingly high, the prosecutor couldn't find any signal. In other words, there's nothing credible to really investigate. Ford's testimony was phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock 'n' roll nothingburger.

There is more representation in that room than the sex crimes expert. Their position needs to be investigated in order to be corroborated. A fair and complete investigation!

[Buckeye]

Excuse me, what is there to investigate?

Sounds like checkmate to me.

[Burls]

Breaking News.
FBI has found the house where the party took place.
They released this photo of the bathroom Ford was looking for.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=23150&d=1538584804
That's your bathroom, Tom.
Quit trying to show off!

[Show Me the Wire]

Then get out of the way and support a complete investigation. This is limited and restricted. Everything else is BS.

The investigation is about opportunity. Ford alleges specifically Kavanaugh had the opportunity to assault her at a specific party attended by specific people. These named specific people refute Ford's claim about this party occurring. No party no opportunity as Ford specifically alleges and this is why the FBI is interviewing the named witnesses to the party.

What is b.s. is taking the position that means is enough. If anyone owns any type of weapon, they have the means to harm a specific person. Any person has the means to assault a specific person. The threshold question is whether or not the person has opportunity to do the alleged act.

If no opportunity to act, there is no act, this is the most basic of logic.

So how many opportunities do you think Ford gave Kavanugh to sexually assault her?

She only alleged one.

[Tom]

No matter what the FBI report says, the dems will move the goal posts again.

This is NOT about Ford at all.
Never was.

That's the story to keep the sheep grazing quitely.

[3 hole tripp]

Exactly. Good post..:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

But to automatically say she is telling the truth, and not only the truth as she sees it, but the iron-clad truth as it sits in reality, simply because she came out and told her story, is the height of absurdity.


This was never stated nor implied. This is the label you have put on it.

What I stated and have repeatedly asked for is a complete and thorough investigation. Others besides Ford have also now come forward. Why never interview these individuals and look to corroborate their statements.

What is absurd is to sweep this under the rug without an investigation, without acting like your guilty.

[3 hole tripp]

No matter what the FBI report says, the dems will move the goal posts again.

This is NOT about Ford at all.
Never was.

That's the story to keep the sheep grazing quitely.

The Senate republicans moved the goalposts by refusing to provide the documents from the start and refusing an investigation from the start. They have behaved like they are in hiding and in full deceit.

[Buckeye]

What documents?

Remember, this is not a trial.

It's supposedly an advise and consent situation.

Your move.

[Buckeye]

Deafening Silence.

I hear that.

[Greyfox]

No matter what the FBI report says, the dems will move the goal posts again.

This is NOT about Ford at all.
Never was.

That's the story to keep the sheep grazing quitely.

BINGO! :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

[B]What is absurd is to sweep this under the rug without an investigation, without acting like your guilty.To even mildly hint that ANYTHING to do with Kavanaugh is being "swept under the rug" is also the height of absurdity.

And you wonder why a very good chunk of America is absolutely fed up with the status quo and the liberal agenda?

[boxcar]

There is more representation in that room than the sex crimes expert. Their position needs to be investigated in order to be corroborated. A fair and complete investigation!

Investigation into what!? That's my point. And that was the point of the criminal prosecutor. How do you investigate what is very likely a fabricated,fictional story? There were so many inconsistencies to Ford's story, it's impossible to even know where to start. It's no wonder at all this latest "investigation" (another background check) has already been completed.

[3 hole tripp]

Investigation into what!? That's my point. And that was the point of the criminal prosecutor. How do you investigate what is very likely a fabricated,fictional story? There were so many inconsistencies to Ford's story, it's impossible to even know where to start. It's no wonder at all this latest "investigation" (another background check) has already been completed.

There are corroborating witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why not? There are character witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why?
What Ford does remember was the sexually assault was committed by Kavanaugh with Judge in the room, what she does remember is the two laughing at her expense while he assaulted her.

Funny how the shitgibbon failed to mention this during his hateful, divisive, misleading, lying speech in ole mississippi last night.

The hate and bigotry continues.

[FantasticDan]

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1047589105008295936

[ReplayRandall]

There are corroborating witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why not? There are character witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why?
What Ford does remember was the sexually assault was committed by Kavanaugh with Judge in the room, what she does remember is the two laughing at her expense while he assaulted her.

Funny how the shitgibbon failed to mention this during his hateful, divisive, misleading, lying speech in ole mississippi last night.

The hate and bigotry continues.

Are you done yet with all your Bull-butter theatrical nonsense?....No one except you and a few lunatic fringer's, believe any of the phony delay tactics idiocy that you've been peddling.....Take yourself and the rest of your ilk back to the Island of Misfit Toys, where Santa Claus can help you out.

[Burls]

No one except you and a few lunatic fringer's, believe any of the phony delay tactics idiocy that you've been peddling...
That's just not so, RR.

Like it or not, in a recent poll,
45 percent of Americans said they now believe Ford,
33 percent said they now believe Kavanaugh, and
22 percent remain undecided.

Correct or mistaken, those who believe Kavanaugh are a decided MINORITY.
That's a FACT.
Get used to it.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...ng-to-new-poll
.

[baconswitchfarm]

Are you done yet with all your Bull-butter theatrical nonsense?....No one except you and a few lunatic fringer's, believe any of the phony delay tactics idiocy that you've been peddling.....Take yourself and the rest of your ilk back to the Island of Misfit Toys, where Santa Claus can help you out.






I can see the politicians involved would be desperate to keep pushing this narrative. I really find it impossible to believe that anyone else who has enough sense to be walking around loose in society could still really find this at all possible or true.

[ReplayRandall]

That's just not so, RR.

Like it or not, in a recent poll,
45 percent of Americans said they now believe Ford,
33 percent said they now believe Kavanaugh, and
22 percent remain undecided.

Correct or mistaken, those who believe Kavanaugh are a decided MINORITY.
That's a FACT.
Get used to it.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...ng-to-new-poll
.


There's no FACT there Burls, just more PBS Fringe nonsense polls....You're act has grown tiresome, I'm afraid I can't stomach anything from you anymore, pseudo facts, memes and all.....Have fun trolling others Sport, you're now on IGNORE.

[boxcar]

There are corroborating witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why not? There are character witnesses that have yet to be interviewed. Why?
What Ford does remember was the sexually assault was committed by Kavanaugh with Judge in the room, what she does remember is the two laughing at her expense while he assaulted her.

Funny how the shitgibbon failed to mention this during his hateful, divisive, misleading, lying speech in ole mississippi last night.

The hate and bigotry continues.

Hey, we're talking about the FBI here. You know...the guys who want to do Trump in. So fear not...if there are any "corroborating witnesses", the Feds found them and it's in their report to the senate in that secret read only room.

What remains to be found out is if "what she does remember" about "the two laughing at her" can be corroborated. Of course, Judge has already been interviewed by the Feds.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/01/politics/mark-judge-fbi-interview/index.html

[Buckeye]

Maybe it's time to get back to the idea of evidence?

No?

I thought so.

My other minor was thirst for Power.

[sammy the sage]

Well...looks like Barns 32 and my take of the situation is taking hold...well maybe...the one undecided democrat...Sen. Coons...will be voting no...based on "Temperment"....doesn't matter what comes out by the FBI...

[lamboguy]

Well...looks like Barns 32 and my take of the situation is taking hold...well maybe...the one undecided democrat...Sen. Coons...will be voting no...based on "Temperment"....doesn't matter what comes out by the FBI...you guys had it right from the beginning of this. my question is why did Trump allow the investigation and just withdraw the nomination right after the hearing?