Relevance is not compulsion.No one is crying about your compulsion.
We're laughing.
Did Ford even identify the year of the party? On the bright side there seems to be clarity on the decade. Kav better bring all his calendars.
So just to be clear. He first claimed he didn't know this woman or that any party took place but he now has calendars with notes from when he was 17 years old that "proves" he wasn't at that particular party.
17 year kept calendars of his activities for decades
What a development!
How many times would you say you mention Blake and Reck in a day?
I actually like liberals very much. I was a minority in law school. The guys I know debate more honestly. You can differ on opinions and still be civil. I think I have been. I think we all have bias whether we acknowledge it or not. I hold Ford to a preponderance of evidence standard, which is what she’d be required to prove if she sued Kavanaugh in civil court. It’s a lower standard than a criminal standard. It’s basically does the evidence make it more likely than not that she was assaulted by Kavanaugh. And I think at this point, Ford can’t come close to that standard.
So while you may call me whatever you want, I have a standard that I use that is tried and true. I know, I know, this isn’t a court of law. But Kavanaugh has been accused of a crime and there must be some standard. If someone thinks I’m wrong, then explain your standard and explain why mine is biased and your stanard isn’t. That’s not directed at Nono, it’s at anyone.
And My position is Ford has no evidence from what I know, but I’m open to reconsider if she fills the gaps or gets some other evidence that can support her claim. I think a non verifiable accusation isn’t sufficient to keep someone off the bench.
I don't really know what's going on, so I'm just going to throw some stuff on the wall.
Don't blame me, everyone does it!
What percent chance do you think there is that Ford is telling the truth? You're carrying this torch awfully high.
For the record, I know Kavanaugh denied the party and the incident. I never heard him say he didn’t know Ford. That would be a good fact to know, but I don’t think it’s been reported.
So just to be clear. He first claimed he didn't know this woman or that any party took place but he now has calendars with notes from when he was 17 years old that "proves" he wasn't at that particular party.
What a development!
Its kind of silly though. How does he prove a negative in your mind? She can’t say where or when this happened. How does he mount a defense? You do agree that he should have a right to prove his innocence? You do think Ford should first fill in the gaps?
What? I’m saying I don’t have first hand knowledge. But this article supports that Ford has been working with activists. It’s as solid as everything you’ve posted and said about ol Ed.
She's likely a triggered uber lefty professor who thinks the ends justifies the means. This is why she's heading into it with gaps.
What an idiot.
lol triggered
The current rush is hilarious to see though.
So many many likes for absolute nonsense. Good thing he's shaping narrative for millions.
There would be no rush if Dems didn't sit on it. So now there is a rush and there is no reason to hold things up based on a story getting less and less credible.
WE HAVE TO RUSH NOW BECAUSE WE HAD TO DELAY FOR MONTHS BEFORE TO STOP BLACK PRESIDENT
Simply the GOAT - still bringing it - even at age 37.
In fact the quicker we get to the story the more accurate it will be. The longer you wait from the alledged incident the less accurate your recall will be.
Nah, I just don't see the need for the scared ass rush they're in.
Why the rush?
If an FBI investigation takes as long as it did for Hill, it would be done before the hearing.
Why not do that?
How's it a rush? This has been going on for months.
The accusations have not been going on for months.
So disingenuous.
Anything beyond her speed is a "rush" and basically rape according to that tweet.
Ford's been granted seven delays and I'm still not calling for a vote before Thursday.
They have but Dems sat on it. Not very important I guess. When should they make the determination?
Why not have the FBI investigate the accusations like they did with Hill?
you could've opted not to include "likely" and your statement would be dead on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote