Reply With Quote
None of what you listed was corroboration.
There is always impeachment, especially since he has lied under oath to Congress.
The rest of it, will likely seem women even more pissed at the dip s 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.
I would point out that his crime appears to be a third degree felony with no statute of limitation in the state it happened.
Nothing Ford has said has been corroborated concerning the “attempted rape”. Nothing. It’s not up for debate.Lying sack of .
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.Partisan hacks.
Why can't you be honest?
Everything is laid out plainly - this was done - with the world watching.
1) Hearings started (after the GOP had refused to even hold a hearing for Merrick Garland) - FACT.
2) Hearings were rushed from the start. GOP had their mind made up this was already done - they did not want ANYTHING to delay this confirmation. FACT
3) 93% of the do ents were hidden. FACT
4) A white house attorney - RESTRICTED - do ents from being discussed or revealed - and marked them as "committee only" - meaning that even if there was some issue that senators had issues on - or questions - to ask kavanaugh about - they were not allowed to make them public. FACT
5) 15 hours before the Hearings started - 142,000 do ents were dumped on the committee - leaving Democrats with a load of unverified sitting before them while they tried to prepare decent questions/issues to query Kavanaugh about. FACT
6) Democrat senators RIGHTFULLY complained and what happened? What did the Republicans respond with? With this: "dems are obstructing" "booker and harris are grandstanding because they are running for president" "dems are horrible people for treating poor brett unfairly" "this is about the mid-terms" FACT
That was BEFORE - new credible allegations surfaced - the SAME allegations that Republicans were purposefully hiding - and you know what happened next: GOP REFUSED to re-open the FBI investigation to verify if this was real or a smear.
"why did she wait 35 years" "feinstein is a leaker" "there is no proof"
Why can't you be honest?
ST rightwingnutjob assholes trying exonerate, approve K by concentrating on calling Ford a liar
but K's attempted rape is now secondary to his repeated lying, and emotional breakdown last Thu in Congress.
No way that K is fit for SCOTUS
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-01-2018 at 12:38 PM.
Why can’t you be honest says the guy calling these credible allegations
So tell me -
what earthly reason did she have 5-10-15 years ago to confide about being attacked - to friends/husband/therapist -
on a man who was nowhere near being a sc justice at that time.
Did she look into her future time machine and see that a criminal president would be in office and would appoint a crooked sexual assaulter as sc justice?
Did she find a left wing therapist - as crazy as herself - to go along with a crazy left wing conspiracy that - 6 years into the future - we will pwn the left wing assholes!
Per Chief of Police and State attorney misdemeanor statue of limitations 1 year
She testified that she never named Kavenaugh to the therapist.
That is not the issue - experts have already said that a therapist is not thinking of names/details- etc - they are helping her with the trauma.
FBI would have taken that into account and would have reported that OTHER witnesses testify that SHE DID mention kavanaughs name.
That detail actually makes her more credible - because she was - at the time - concerned with her therapy, her trauma and not worried about some left wing conpsiracy - Dr. Ford is not responsible if the therapist marked down names or not.
Again - the FBI - would have interviewed the therapist to get an idea if this was legit or some made up scam.
ah, I stand corrected. I read the law as it stands today, not at the time of the offense.
Per Chief of Police and State attorney misdemeanor statue of limitations 1 year
Fair enough. Finish the phrase for me, mother er:
"High crimes and... "
That is understandable, but also damned convenient. Everyone must recognize that. ALL she has to know is the assault happened. Not when. Not where. Not who was there. Nothing else. HE has to be able to account for every place he was, everything he did for an indeterminate amount of time. Ultimately it doesn't matter. Red will believe him. Blue will her. There will not be enough proof one way or the other (and I'm convinced video of the alleged incident happening or not would not enough. Bottom line is, without evidence, he must be given the benefit of the doubt. These "lies" that are being conjured up that he supposedly uttered are not definable as such. Winehole tried to equate this with Clinton, who was caught saying he didn't have sex with someone when he did. Kavanaugh never said he didn't drink. He never said he didn't drink until he was drunk (in fact he admitted to sometimes drinking too much). The only thing categorically denied was committing sexual assault against anyone, and he testified that he has never blacked out.
I myself was stumbling, stupid, incoherently drunk more times that I can count. I experienced memory loss only one time. Take that single instance away, and I could make the same claim as Kavanaugh. And MANY people, who saw me all those other times, could testify to all kinds of stupid, belligerent I got up to.
This whole investigation is silly. People keep thinking there is rape proof out there if the FBI keeps looking. At first, Dems were asking for just 3 days, now the FBI has to keep looking until it substantiates Ford's claims or prove that she made it up. Therein lies (pun intended) the problem. Everyone, including the Dems on the judiciary committee (a good portion of them are prosecutors) know there will not be any evidence that will be discovered, no matter how long this investigation goes on. There's a reason for the statute of limitations because evidence runs stale after 30 years. Moreover, Ford is yet to give anyone concrete facts that can be verified. If you don't know where it was, how she got there, when it was, who was there, and how she got home, how can you investigate? When all the people alleged to have been there deny or don't remember any such gathering, how do you investigate?
Kavanaugh, in trying to prove a negative (which is impossible, especially under Ford's claims), provided the only potential evidence in his calendars, and that's assuming the year is correct since it's changed a bunch of times.
An investigation will show that there is no evidence that this ever occurred.
And then people will say this is a job interview. But is this a typical job interview? No. Normal job interviews don't involve people paying millions to stop you from getting a job. Normal job interviews do not involve newspapers and the FBI digging deep into your background and asking people to come forward with anything potentially contradictory about you. And normal job interviews do not involve people so passionate about you not getting the job, that they have the incentive to make up (other claims against Kavanaugh) or speak up without any proof (Ford). This is not a typical job interview and people that keep referencing it like it is are either insincere or naive.
Last edited by cd98; 10-01-2018 at 01:26 PM.
But how do we know her memory is crystal clear. Sure, she said that after a week of prep from her attorneys (one of which was recommended by democrats and is heavily involved in the Me Too movement). How do we know they didn't talk her into being certain just like the attorneys did for the second accuser? And how do we know that her memory is correct. It's been 30 years. How do we know that she thinks she remembers, but she's wrong? It's not unreasonable to say that there could be mistaken iden y.
Pretty much this
Move them goal posts!
If Kavanaugh perjured himself, he will be impeached, so don't sweat it.
So, just boiled down:
Ford being a liar (zero corroboration to her story) has begat a huge rabbit holes of Kavanaugh being just a massive liar, which makes him unfit to be a SC judge and Repubs are super pissed that the original issue (Ford's allegations) are being side stepped because Kav being a ginormous liar is more startling. Is that about right?
Kind of. His testimony was pretty stunning with the lies and conspiracy theories. I can see why Trump nominated him tho.
It pretty much stops with being a proven major liar so far as being a SCOTUS nom goes.
Dems are gonna win this, and they should. Ironically, the "moral" ones will overstep and call Liar McLiarface a rapist based on lies.
he may be impeached by a Dem house after Nov elections (but they don't have the balls, the less wimps),
but the Repug Senate won't convict, they and WH have invested too much of themselves in covering up for K, for ramming him through to SCOTUS
Yeah, it was just nuts how K won the battle but gave away the war over "Devil's Triangle" and Renate after his Qanon rant.
What do you mean by gave away the war? Do you think those lies are going to cost him the vote of each of Collins, Murkowski, Heitkamp, and Manchin? Because if he gets any one of their votes he is confirmed.
I should have said "possibly" gave away the war. K's testimony actually gives Democrats another crack at him if they win the house.
But you're right. The FBI investigation seems quaintly cir scribed and unless Avenatti actually has anything, K probably gets the votes.
I don't think many in this thread understand what show they're watching. They seem to think they're watching court tv or Judge Judy.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions