Printable View
Because he didn't want to be asked, under oath:Quote:
Originally Posted by 101A
"is it possible you don't remember this, because you were drunk".
Pretty obvious why he would lie about that, if he was, as other accounts corroborate, an aggressive mean drunk.
"Bart O'Kavanaugh"... from Judge's book detailing the heavy drinking they did.
Yes, indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Does his friend detail a book where he describes his heavy drinking with his friend "Bart O'Kavanaugh"? yes or no?
You go and list a load of relevant things to show he's a liar and throw this turd in there. There are probably a billion things Google doesn't know, and of them I'd wager "names for drinking games from 40 years ago" is one of those billion things.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
I haven’t read the book, but I will assume it does.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
When the FBI completes its investigation and can not corroborate anything Ford has claimed what’s the next step for the Resistance?
"When the FBI completes its investigation"
the WH/Repug limited investigation is fraudulent, inconclusive, a fucking coverup
Ford's claim that K and Judge roughed her up, attempted to rape her is now secondary.
K's proven repeated lying years ago to Congress (claiming he didn't read Miranda's stolen Dem docs, didn't work on Yoo's torture docs) while nominated for Federal judgeship, and repeated lying now, is the overwhelming, fatal objection for his nomination now.
Then throw in the whining, anger, petulance, sniffly crying, the paranoid partisan conspiratorial attacks on Clintons :lol,
and we see exposed a REALLY SHITTY excuse of a really dumb, stupid, immature human being, never mind a SCOTUS whore for life.
Most people my age or so are familiar with this. I remember the slang of my teenage years well enough. It is a sex act, in case you are wondering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
... based on RL. book was horrible, btw.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Eyup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reck
Everyone he grew up with knows what the culture was. Stupid, stupid thing to lie about.
:lmao Fapps’ bluff gets called, so he deflects instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiTroll
I find her testimony credible. She is not out to make things up, and is telling the truth. His drunkenness, as well as Judge's doesn't preclude either of them from not remembering, and truthfully saying "I don't remember, and I never saw."Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
People have been given the death penalty on the same amount of evidence, so I am comfortable with simply wanting him not confirmed.
He is a lying, hyper-partisan douchebag. Just the kind of person you guys like.
Trump: "the scope of this investigation is up to the Republican senators"
The same Republican senators who began this Supreme Court Confirmation cover-up.
Where is the outrage?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
2002 - she told her husband - he can testify - Republican senators refuse to hear his testimony.
2012 - Dr. Ford - told her therapist - Repukes refused to allow the therapist testimony
2018 - Dr. Ford took and passed a polygraph - Repukes refused to allow her full polygraph report to be introduced at hearing
Friends that she confided in YEARS BEFORE KAVANAUGH was even in the news - were not allowed to testify - by - yup - Repuke senators
So, Chucho/DMC -
yep plenty of corroboration - but the cover up goes on.
:lol of course you doQuote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
Sex-Crimes Prosecutor Details 12 Massive Inconsistencies In Kavanaugh Accuser’s Story
http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/01/...ccusers-story/
None of that is corroboration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs Homer
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
If I ever needed to find a few people that could be easily brainwashed and used as useful idiots -
boy - I would hit payload on this forum!
Mitchell summarized her report for the committee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs Homer
"In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/09/30/pol...9%26page%3D156
Bill Clinton lost his law licence for misrepresenting an aspect of his personal life under oath, and rightly so. Doesn't an oath mean anything?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
All of that is corroboration - when the FBI is allowed to freely chase down those leads and possibly connect the dots.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Who knows where those leads - end up?
Who knows if the accomplice - after being presented with damning corroborated evidence against him - decides to take a plea to save his own ass and throw the main assaulter under the bus?
"I tried to stop him" "GOP paid me to be quiet"
Or -
those leads could exonerate Kavanaugh and maybe even expose Dr. Ford as some fraud paid by left wing donors and she could be exposed for fraud and prosecuted.
But -
that would mean that the investigation would be allowed to continue until this truth could be exposed - and YOU surely do not want that. Republican Senators do not want that because that would mean that the elections would arrive before their master plan is put into place.
Trump would not want that because the ONE guy that thinks the president is above the law would be disqualified.
As she mentioned in her testimony, as her own expert witness, missing the little details is exactly what one would expect from anybody, especially trauma victims.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
The relevant part... is crystal clear.
In fact, yes or no, can trauma victims not remember some less relevant details, but have fully accurate memories from the event itself?
Lying sack of shit. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Multiple classmates of him have already said he was lying about not being a drunk, which ford testified to.
That itself is a corraboration.
And that's funny you're quoting a lady that by her own admission said 5 minute increments wasn't enough to conduct an interview.
I also find it peculiar how she's all in on how Ford's allegations are weak and not prosecutable but is quiet on anything regarding Kavanaugh. :lol Partisan hacks.
as recently as 1998 perjury was an impeachable offenseQuote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
There is always impeachment, especially since he has lied under oath to Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
The rest of it, will likely seem women even more pissed at the dipshits in the Republican party than they are now.
Susan Collins will be facing a difficult election at the very least, depending on her vote. A crowd PAC fund has raised about 1.7M in pledges for her future opponent if she votes to confirm him.
Either Sen. Collins VOTES NO on Kavanaugh OR we fund her future opponent
https://www.crowdpac.com/campaigns/3...uture-opponent
None of what you listed was corroboration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs Homer
I would point out that his crime appears to be a third degree felony with no statute of limitation in the state it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Nothing Ford has said has been corroborated concerning the “attempted rape”. Nothing. It’s not up for debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reck