Kavenaugh Hearing Travesty. Dems Obstruct throughout

[AndyC]

I can only laugh when I watch the news where the democrats are claiming that it is so unfair what has happened to the accuser because her identity has been leaked. Since the democrats were the ones with the info who else but a democrat could have leaked? Seems like a self-inflicted wound that they now want to use as another excuse to delay.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Look how deep her ties go into the far left, fusion GPS,

The law firm which is handling her case did some work for Fusion GPS. SCANDAL!!! A law firm has more than one client. It might be that a law firm's different clients do not know each other. in fact, it is extremely likely.


kavenaugh mother foreclosing on this ladies parents home.
hcap addressed this earlier in this thread. Kavenaugh's mother was the presiding judge on a hearing involving foreclosure on the home of Ford's parents. Not only did she not foreclose on the house; she dismissed the case with prejudice. That means the case can not be brought again.


Internet buzz flying around that this gal was waiting in the wings with the same story on the Gorsuch nomination.

That quote is from the liberal website Gateway Pundit. No, I'm sorry. Gateway Pundit is a conservative website and even they want no part of that allegation.

Call it all BS, could be. About the same BS as she is spreading.

It is BS, yet you insist on spreading it.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by OntheRail

Yes a repressed memory... she claimed that something happened way back when... that there were four UNNAMED people in the room. Where was the room..? Can't say... when? Can't say. So could she may have had an incident at some point maybe. As a die hard lib and anti Trumper do I think she would twist things to help her side. HELL YES...

So four shift to two and one becomes Kavanaugh the other Judge whom she knows wrote a book about being a drunk.

This whole investigation off the 35 yr old vapor of a memory that the Dem's sat on for months is a sham... and a shame.

If she refuses to come in front of the Senate then so be it move ahead... course all the Dimocrats will be holding there jaws and saying we must delay and investigate stall more to find something. No doubt the Pussy-hats will be out in force ranting and raving.

Some people keep calling this a repressed memory. Can you point out where Ford, or her therapist, characterized it as such. My understanding is that it was something she revealed in therapy, but she was well aware of it all along. The therapy session just happened to be the first time she told anyone else.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Yep.....give your head a shake, she can’t say when the party occurred, exactly where? The so called offender has apparently never acted in a similar manner for the next 35 plus years.

So you ruin the guys life over a high school indiscretion? He did not commit a rape. He was a 17 yr old kid. I don’t buy it anyway. I think she’s full of crap.

These kind of guys don’t suddenly turn into Dudley Doright and never act out again. Look at the dozens of guys who have been named in the #metoo movement. They all have multiple victims. But this Kavanaugh guy never touched another woman in that way again. Yep......I’m buying that.......

You're right, they don't and they do. Others will come forward. Count on it.

[jimmyb]

42058558_2088115547873379_6768278175370706944_n.jpg

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by upthecreek

Feinstein saya accuser may not be totally truthful

Seriously, learn how to read. Feinstein said that she (Feinstein) does not know if Ford is totally truthful. That is very different from saying that Ford is lying.


in other words, Senator Feinstein is waiting for the evidence. Unlike some.

And before you say something dumb, all I want is to delay the hearing until a thorough investigation can take place. If Kavanaugh really has nothing to hide, he should have no problem with that. If Republican Senators are concerned with anything other than packing the court, they should not have a problem either.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

Yep, the evidence in this case would never make it into an actual courtroom. A Prosecuter would be a fool to pursue charges.

You don't know what the evidence is. There has been no investigation. Besides, we are not talking about a criminal investigation. We are talking about an investigation related to the background check conducted on every nominee to federal office That is something the FBI does as a matter of routine.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Seriously, learn how to read. Feinstein said that she (Feinstein) does not know if Ford is totally truthful. That is very different from saying that Ford is lying.


in other words, Senator Feinstein is waiting for the evidence. Unlike some.

And before you say something dumb, all I want is to delay the hearing until a thorough investigation can take place. If Kavanaugh really has nothing to hide, he should have no problem with that. If Republican Senators are concerned with anything other than packing the court, they should not have a problem either.

Get it fixed Mosty, what a Bullshit post....You're a fraud just like Feinstein, Kamala Harris, Liz Warren, Hillary, Pelosi, etc,.....Screw the whole lot of you, as I've never seen this kind of scum before in my life that would ever represent ME.....You actually DEFEND these people?....God save your pathetic souls....

[davew]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Seriously, learn how to read. Feinstein said that she (Feinstein) does not know if Ford is totally truthful. That is very different from saying that Ford is lying.


in other words, Senator Feinstein is waiting for the evidence. Unlike some.

And before you say something dumb, all I want is to delay the hearing until a thorough investigation can take place. If Kavanaugh really has nothing to hide, he should have no problem with that. If Republican Senators are concerned with anything other than packing the court, they should not have a problem either.

you are correct again sir, most can easily see the subtle difference in ->

accuser may not be totally truthful

and

does not know if Ford is totally truthful

[jimmyb]

Originally Posted by mostpost

She is a professor at Brandeis University. I'm pretty sure she would have gotten that job even without the Clarence Thomas controversy, After all she was a law clerk for a federal judge. Dummies don't usually get those positions.


As for publicity; I have rarely heard anything about Hill in the past 25 years.

On October 20, 1998, Anita Hill published the book Speaking Truth to Power.

2011, Hill's second book, Reimagining Equality

Anita Hill became a proponent for women's rights and feminism. This can be seen through the chapter she wrote in the book Women and leadership

Hill received the American Bar Association's Commission on Women in the Profession's "Women of Achievement" award in 1992

She also serves on the Board of Trustees for Southern Vermont College in Bennington, Vermont.[

She was inducted into the Oklahoma Women's Hall of Fame in 1993.

On January 7, 2017, Hill was inducted as an honorary member of Zeta Phi Beta sorority at their National Executive Board Meeting in Dallas, Texas. The following year, Hill was awarded an honorary LLM degree by Wesleyan University.

Hill has provided commentary on gender and race issues on national television programs, including 60 Minutes, Face the Nation and Meet the Press. She has been a speaker on the topic of commercial law as well as race and women's rights. She is also the author of articles that have been published in The New York Times and Newsweek and has contributed to many scholarly and legal publications in the areas of international commercial law, bankruptcy, and civil rights.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by mostpost

And before you say something dumb, all I want is to delay the hearing until a thorough investigation can take place.

A "thorough investigation" by whom of what? The FBI has already stated several times that this is not in their jurisdiction. No charges have been filed at any level of government.

You know the Dems weren't passively sitting on this for 2 months. They were digging for dirt for 2 months and could not find a trace of it. Feinstein admits that she has no idea of the truth is.

The accuser herself can provide no facts to investigate and refuses to testify before the committee until the FBI investigates, knowing full well that won't happen. Anyone with any possible connection to or knowledge of the "fact" says it didn't happen.

So who should investigate and where should they start?

[baconswitchfarm]

Originally Posted by mostpost

She is a professor at Brandeis University. I'm pretty sure she would have gotten that job even without the Clarence Thomas controversy, After all she was a law clerk for a federal judge. Dummies don't usually get those positions.


As for publicity; I have rarely heard anything about Hill in the past 25 years.

Her estimated net worth is everywhere between 10 an 25 million. If she makes 150k or so teaching that means almost all the money shes accumulated in life is due to Clarence Thomas.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Have you looked at her resume? There's a good chance she's already a millionaire, and that's not even counting her husband's earnings as a big pharma executive.

Gee, I thought libs though big business was evil, and big pharma in particular.

So Soro's wealth, and Big Business wealth is OK this time.

Ok.

[OntheRail]

Originally Posted by Clocker

A "thorough investigation" by whom of what? The FBI has already stated several times that this is not in their jurisdiction. No charges have been filed at any level of government.

You know the Dems weren't passively sitting on this for 2 months. They were digging for dirt for 2 months and could not find a trace of it. Feinstein admits that she has no idea of the truth is.

The accuser herself can provide no facts to investigate and refuses to testify before the committee until the FBI investigates, knowing full well that won't happen. Anyone with any possible connection to or knowledge of the "fact" says it didn't happen.

So who should investigate and where should they start?

That's the Sixty-four dollar question... when and where to start.

With her not willing to testify under Oath... weighs the scale towards BS.

[Tom]

in other words, Senator Feinstein is waiting for the evidence. Unlike some.

No, they are looking to drag out the vote until after mid-terms.
They know there is no substance, but just the fact she won't testify under oath until after an FBI investigates tells the whole story.