My business professor warned us about power and leadership. If you want leadership position be squeaky clean. Then he warned that we should always be suspicious of those that want power. The key question to ask to a power seeker is what do they intend to do with new found power? Kienjeku if I make you head toilet digger what will use this title to do.Absolutely.
If Kavanaugh was willing to rape a woman 30 years ago ..he will be willing to misuse his judicial power. His character is not squeaky clean
This shit happened too long ago...in their teens ! who is not guilty of something close to that in their teens? imbibing alcohol, smoking, stealing parents cars...cmon if dems have nothing else against the guy they should just go ahead and confirm him. Dems are just desperate, they had a chance and blew it trying to rig Killary...
When you go for such a post be ready to be stripped naked. If you ever heard from women who passed through rape or attempted rape you would know that the scars linger on for even 100 years. If the man tried to rape even with 14 years he then has to carry the consequences just like his victim.
There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
It's completely understandable for a rape victim to go silent for years. The Catholic priest abuse case shows even men respond the same way. If we understand the Catholic church abuse cases then we must give the "me too" women a chance to be heard. If their allegations are true, Brett should have enough courage with request for his nomination to be dropped. It's never too late to admit wrong.
Meticoulious record keeping by institutions..most institutions are oblivious of this danger or know they need something to negotiate...I worked for a fortune 500 company that hid memos about how dangerous their products were in plain sight.they actually sent tonnes of evidence to a law firm oblivious to self incriminating evidence contained in most ofc the docs...needs to say they settled the case for 1.2 billion dollars and they have other two worthy about a 1 billionIt's completely understandable for a rape victim to go silent for years. The Catholic priest abuse case shows even men respond the same way. If we understand the Catholic church abuse cases then we must give the "me too" women a chance to be heard. If their allegations are true, Brett should have enough courage with request for his nomination to be dropped. It's never too late to admit wrong.
Maybe the catholic yardstick is bad. I have always wondered how such old cases are backed by evidence
Meticoulious record keeping by institutions..most institutions are oblivious of this danger or know they need something to negotiate...I worked for a fortune 500 company that hid memos about how dangerous their products were in plain sight.they actually sent tonnes of evidence to a law firm oblivious to self incriminating evidence contained in most ofc the docs...needs to say they settled the case for 1.2 billion dollars and they have other two worthy about a 1 billionIt's completely understandable for a rape victim to go silent for years. The Catholic priest abuse case shows even men respond the same way. If we understand the Catholic church abuse cases then we must give the "me too" women a chance to be heard. If their allegations are true, Brett should have enough courage with request for his nomination to be dropped. It's never too late to admit wrong.
Maybe the catholic yardstick is bad. I have always wondered how such old cases are backed by evidence
I feel sorry for Kavanaugh. A second woman has come up wit fresh accusations. :) :) :)
This time he was already a grownup and not a drunk teen.There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
It's completely understandable for a rape victim to go silent for years. The Catholic priest abuse case shows even men respond the same way. If we understand the Catholic church abuse cases then we must give the "me too" women a chance to be heard. If their allegations are true, Brett should have enough courage with request for his nomination to be dropped. It's never too late to admit wrong.
Maybe the catholic yardstick is bad. I have always wondered how such old cases are backed by evidence
Whats up with Republicans and rape?I feel sorry for Kavanaugh. A second woman has come up wit fresh accusations. :) :) :)
This time he was already a grownup and not a drunk teen.There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
This guy is one those you don't want within a mile of your daughter. Date rape drug type of guy. If he was black he would probably already have been through the slammer a couple of times. Instead he is getting ready to join the SCOTUS. And it's always a Republican.
Whats up with Republicans and rape?I feel sorry for Kavanaugh. A second woman has come up wit fresh accusations. :) :) :)
This time he was already a grownup and not a drunk teen.There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
This guy is one those you don't want within a mile of your daughter. Date rape drug type of guy. If he was black he would probably already have been through the slammer a couple of times. Instead he is getting ready to join the SCOTUS. And it's always a Republican.
its not a republican thing its mainly college kids especially in ivy league colleges. That's when young people get to experiment with drugs and what have you.....
Normal drinking day in college
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn2zJFqXsAIc_Qs.jpg)Whats up with Republicans and rape?I feel sorry for Kavanaugh. A second woman has come up wit fresh accusations. :) :) :)
This time he was already a grownup and not a drunk teen.There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
This guy is one those you don't want within a mile of your daughter. Date rape drug type of guy. If he was black he would probably already have been through the slammer a couple of times. Instead he is getting ready to join the SCOTUS. And it's always a Republican.
its not a republican thing its mainly college kids especially in ivy league colleges. That's when young people get to experiment with drugs and what have you.....
Normal drinking day in college
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn2zJFqXsAIc_Qs.jpg)Whats up with Republicans and rape?I feel sorry for Kavanaugh. A second woman has come up wit fresh accusations. :) :) :)
This time he was already a grownup and not a drunk teen.There is a lot of dirt on this woman too including her family CIA connections. I feel sorry for her because she is being used as a pawn in high stakes political games. 75 % chances Kavanaugh will be confirmed while the poor lady will be scared for life.
This guy is one those you don't want within a mile of your daughter. Date rape drug type of guy. If he was black he would probably already have been through the slammer a couple of times. Instead he is getting ready to join the SCOTUS. And it's always a Republican.
Absolutely. But the denial part is what gets me. Kava should just admit that he may have done something wrong as a teenager and apologize, case closed. Let the pieces fall.
What sexual assault? am sure the democrats are sensing Ford testimony might not stand and now they are bringing another me too victim..big difference between horse play and sexual assault..
What sexual assault? am sure the democrats are sensing Ford testimony might not stand and now they are bringing another me too victim..big difference between horse play and sexual assault..
Locking a girl in a bedroom, pinning her down and trying to remove her clothes against her will perhaps?
its not a republican thing its mainly college kids especially in ivy league colleges. That's when young people get to experiment with drugs and what have you.....
Normal drinking day in college
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn2zJFqXsAIc_Qs.jpg)https://www.firstpost.com/world/by-showing-harrys-bottom-murdoch-was-mooning-the-establishment-431515.html
https://www.eonline.com/news/340478/prince-harry-naked-vegas-photos-anatomy-of-a-royal-scandal
Couldn't agree more. Didn't stop Harry from becoming even more royal, did it?
She did not have clothes she had bikini 2 pieces she alleges that she was going to the bathroom and he was standing next to an open door and he bumped her she fell on the bed and he jumped on top of her then the other friend Judge jumped on top of them where they fell off the bed laughing....sounds like horse play to me....What sexual assault? am sure the democrats are sensing Ford testimony might not stand and now they are bringing another me too victim..big difference between horse play and sexual assault..
Locking a girl in a bedroom, pinning her down and trying to remove her clothes against her will perhaps?
I am sure this very highly educated lady knows the difference between horse play and sexual assault and do not need you to speak on her behalf.She did not have clothes she had bikini 2 pieces she alleges that she was going to the bathroom and he was standing next to an open door and he bumped her she fell on the bed and he jumped on top of her then the other friend Judge jumped on top of them where they fell off the bed laughing....sounds like horse play to me....What sexual assault? am sure the democrats are sensing Ford testimony might not stand and now they are bringing another me too victim..big difference between horse play and sexual assault..
Locking a girl in a bedroom, pinning her down and trying to remove her clothes against her will perhaps?
it took the highly educated lady 36 years to report "sexual assault" case? which seem not to remember most details. I believe even her she knows very well there is no there......
I am sure this very highly educated lady knows the difference between horse play and sexual assault and do not need you to speak on her behalf.She did not have clothes she had bikini 2 pieces she alleges that she was going to the bathroom and he was standing next to an open door and he bumped her she fell on the bed and he jumped on top of her then the other friend Judge jumped on top of them where they fell off the bed laughing....sounds like horse play to me....What sexual assault? am sure the democrats are sensing Ford testimony might not stand and now they are bringing another me too victim..big difference between horse play and sexual assault..
Locking a girl in a bedroom, pinning her down and trying to remove her clothes against her will perhaps?
?s=21Brett Kavanaugh: "I've never sexually assaulted anyone - not in high school, not ever. I've always treated women with dignity and respect." #TheStory https://t.co/ZexbiQZjf2 pic.twitter.com/t8tiVt5EMC
— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 24, 2018
He was a Virgin in high schoolO
Invalid Tweet ID?s=21?s=21Brett Kavanaugh: "I've never sexually assaulted anyone - not in high school, not ever. I've always treated women with dignity and respect." #TheStory https://t.co/ZexbiQZjf2 pic.twitter.com/t8tiVt5EMC
— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 24, 2018
Theres a sense in which #MeToo excesses are working in his favor. Mere accusations are bringing men down regardless of their veracity. Thats why I think he should not back off
He was a Virgin in high school
Invalid Tweet ID?s=21?s=21Brett Kavanaugh: "I've never sexually assaulted anyone - not in high school, not ever. I've always treated women with dignity and respect." #TheStory https://t.co/ZexbiQZjf2 pic.twitter.com/t8tiVt5EMC
— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 24, 2018
Theres a sense in which #MeToo excesses are working in his favor. Mere accusations are bringing men down regardless of their veracity. Thats why I think he should not back off
Does oral sex count if you are a virgin?
Bitmask. just you know Clarence Thomas was a sexual harasser. Looks like the less sexual activity you get the more of a harraser you become at young age.
Does oral sex count if you are a virgin?
Bitmask. just you know Clarence Thomas was a sexual harasser. Looks like the less sexual activity you get the more of a harraser you become at young age.
Does oral sex count if you are a virgin?
Not sure. But gang rape might matter https://people.com/politics/michael-avenatti-brett-kavanaugh-gang-rapes-high-school/.Bitmask. just you know Clarence Thomas was a sexual harasser. Looks like the less sexual activity you get the more of a harraser you become at young age.
There is some level of compensatory behavior I think. Having spent his younger years working like hell to get his accomplishments, someone might tend to see women as one of the spoils of that effort that he is entitled to. Clarence Thomas was pretty crude and clumsy in his moves on Anita Hill. So there is also an element of just sucking at attracting a woman in a non-transactional way.
sad that you made me read that sob story from porn start lawyer 'krimino' Avenatti. That guy is a douche bag, always inserting himself in stories that he knows zilch about. On this one I would not be surprised he is making things up, very good at that. How I wish he would pay his taxes before assuming the leadership of democrat party or its main spokesperson. bure kabisa
Does oral sex count if you are a virgin?
Not sure. But gang rape might matter https://people.com/politics/michael-avenatti-brett-kavanaugh-gang-rapes-high-school/ (https://people.com/politics/michael-avenatti-brett-kavanaugh-gang-rapes-high-school/).Bitmask. just you know Clarence Thomas was a sexual harasser. Looks like the less sexual activity you get the more of a harraser you become at young age.
There is some level of compensatory behavior I think. Having spent his younger years working like hell to get his accomplishments, someone might tend to see women as one of the spoils of that effort that he is entitled to. Clarence Thomas was pretty crude and clumsy in his moves on Anita Hill. So there is also an element of just sucking at attracting a woman in a non-transactional way.
Seems like Democrats have decided to go full porn on Kavanaugh. First it was hand on Ford's daughter mouth then it was Ramirez getting dick slapped and now they have Kavanaugh running trains on high schoolers. I give up on Democrats aka porncrats.
Fourth woman steps up.
Kavanaugh is dead
I have not seen any Democrat hand in this saga. Why blame Democrats for a teenager's sins? Did they know 36 years ago this brat would one day be a candidate for the Supreme Court?Seems like Democrats have decided to go full porn on Kavanaugh. First it was hand on Ford's daughter mouth then it was Ramirez getting dick slapped and now they have Kavanaugh running trains on high schoolers. I give up on Democrats aka porncrats.
On the other hand, one may also argue if Brett did something he knew might have repercussions he wouldn't have kept a 1982 calendar, would he?
Dr Ford is speaking the truth. Brat's own calendar puts them together at party, July 1st 1982. She had never seen this calendar before. It includes the names Mark Judge and PJ Smyth and some other kid she didn't recognize.
Even without that, I can't think of any reasonable explanation why she would make this up. Certainly not the conspiracy theory that the brat advanced.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoIybrHXcAEMXCF.jpg)
This exposes these white men debauchery. The holy than thou conservatives are be8ng proven everyday to be pigs. These church going bible thumping conservatives are being fought by their own women. American white women are tired of their ownReminds me of Pharisees in the Bible.
curious....IF squi is dr. Ford the calendar indicates on Friday he went to the beach with squi over the weekend...........
curious....IF squi is dr. Ford the calendar indicates on Friday he went to the beach with squi over the weekend...........
My bad. I should have said going out with Squi.
Lindsey has been a hot mess for some time now.
Dr Ford is speaking the truth. Brat's own calendar puts them together at party, July 1st 1982. She had never seen this calendar before. It includes the names Mark Judge and PJ Smyth and some other kid she didn't recognize.
Even without that, I can't think of any reasonable explanation why she would make this up. Certainly not the conspiracy theory that the brat advanced.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoIybrHXcAEMXCF.jpg)
i come from a strict christian upbringing and there's no way an upstanding Christian boy would have behaved the way Brett did back then. this might be excusable in some sense if he was orphaned and troubled upbringing conquered all type scenario. But he had a normal upbringing. He nearly raped and killed that girl, and sexually molested her.
He's a psychopath and a danger to society. If he could get a way with it at 17, he likely has a pattern of abuse. Just a matter of time before bit by bit his psychopathic lifestyle comes to light.
I was appalled by his defensive and offensive outbursts, what a loser, what a cunt.
The audacity he has to keep screaming beer, beer, BEER! As if any beer company will endorse this fcked up psycho.
Dr Ford is speaking the truth. Brat's own calendar puts them together at party, July 1st 1982. She had never seen this calendar before. It includes the names Mark Judge and PJ Smyth and some other kid she didn't recognize.
Even without that, I can't think of any reasonable explanation why she would make this up. Certainly not the conspiracy theory that the brat advanced.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoIybrHXcAEMXCF.jpg)
Yeah,
Saw the fixation with July 1st entry. Kavanaugh chose the easier way; deny the meeting ever took place instead of what went down over that meeting. A judge lying under oath. But I don't think his 36 year old teenage indiscretions are sufficient grounds to paint him in the same strokes as Weinstein
Yeah,
Saw the fixation with July 1st entry. Kavanaugh chose the easier way; deny the meeting ever took place instead of what went down over that meeting. A judge lying under oath. But I don't think his 36 year old teenage indiscretions are sufficient grounds to paint him in the same strokes as Weinstein
Yeah,
Saw the fixation with July 1st entry. Kavanaugh chose the easier way; deny the meeting ever took place instead of what went down over that meeting. A judge lying under oath. But I don't think his 36 year old teenage indiscretions are sufficient grounds to paint him in the same strokes as Weinstein
He lies under oath. And publicly spouts anti-Clinton conspiracy theories. The last thing SCOTUS needs is a conspiracy theorist. It's scary how far this guy has gotten(let alone where he is about to go) with this kind of baggage. He is a Donald Trump in a judicial office. Imagine Trump in a lifetime appointment.
I personally don't swallow the accusation against Kavanaugh. Too many facts against believing it.
-First, it's a recovered memory, not a normal memory, of being assaulted, and they are notorious for leading to wrongful accusations including jail time for innocent men.
-Secondly, every witness named has denied it under oath, including Dr. Ford's best friend and Mark Judge went further to say Kavanaugh just wasn't that sort of person.
-Thirdly, she recalls almost no other details around the incident which is at least concerning. I mean things like place (forget time).
-Fourthly, people who have known him his entire life since high school, college, professional life, vouch for his character especially towards women. I believe 35 or 65 women have defended him, something like that.
-Fifthly, his demeanour during his testimony was consistent with the righteous indignation of an innocent person that's been wrongly accused. I actually teared up watching it. If he's lying, he has to be a damn good actor or a sociopath, which I honestly have little reason to even suspect given his entire life of good behaviour.
I think what's happened to him is incredibly unfair. I didn't care 2 cents before but now I do want him confirmed above any other person Trump may replace him with. His life has been destroyed by a totally factless accusation based on a memory of something that's supposed to have happened nearly 40 years ago between underaged kids at a party, and that was recovered decades later in a therapy session and that remains not only uncorroborated but refuted in addition. There's too much there for me to put one scintilla of weight behind Dr. Ford's recovered memory and I now feel sorry for the man, who is otherwise eminently qualified for the position. If Trump abandons him now, he'll be utterly ruined. I hope he does not.
Edit: So it was not a recovered memory, that was a misreporting by an anchor, I have checked. Still, my position is the same.
OMG! Kadame, this is not a criminal trial so please spare us the cut and paste rethuglican irrelevant talking points. This is a political job interview and the bar is very low. Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, never even got an interview with the rethuglicas so please spare me lectures about fairness. This job is not an entitlement and he should pull himself out of consideration, resign from the circuit court and ran for office because he is a political hack and not fit to be in the SCOTUS. He lies too much and his judicial temperament stinks like a skunk. This is win win for the DEMS. If he is ploughed through then he enters the SCOTUS as damaged goods and can only redeem himself by siding with the women SCOTUS for the next two years. On the other hand, each time he comes up with a conservative ruling, he will only inspire the liberal voters more and widen the gender gap. This is a win win for Dems.Spare you what? Who forces you to read posts you don't like? You're not the only one allowed opinions here on Kavanaugh or any other topic. For that matter, spare me your emotional diatribe.
I personally don't swallow the accusation against Kavanaugh. Too many facts against believing it.
-First, it's a recovered memory, not a normal memory, of being assaulted, and they are notorious for leading to wrongful accusations including jail time for innocent men.
-Secondly, every witness named has denied it under oath, including Dr. Ford's best friend and Mark Judge went further to say Kavanaugh just wasn't that sort of person.
-Thirdly, she recalls almost no other details around the incident which is at least concerning. I mean things like place (forget time).
-Fourthly, people who have known him his entire life since high school, college, professional life, vouch for his character especially towards women. I believe 35 or 65 women have defended him, something like that.
-Fifthly, his demeanour during his testimony was consistent with the righteous indignation of an innocent person that's been wrongly accused. I actually teared up watching it. If he's lying, he has to be a damn good actor or a sociopath, which I honestly have little reason to even suspect given his entire life of good behaviour.
I think what's happened to him is incredibly unfair. I didn't care 2 cents before but now I do want him confirmed above any other person Trump may replace him with. His life has been destroyed by a totally factless accusation based on a memory of something that's supposed to have happened nearly 40 years ago between underaged kids at a party, and that was recovered decades later in a therapy session and that remains not only uncorroborated but refuted in addition. There's too much there for me to put one scintilla of weight behind Dr. Ford's recovered memory and I now feel sorry for the man, who is otherwise eminently qualified for the position. If Trump abandons him now, he'll be utterly ruined. I hope he does not.
Edit: So it was not a recovered memory, that was a misreporting by an anchor, I have checked. Still, my position is the same.
All that garbage from Dr. Ford is derived from a book Judge wrote but let's face all the Democrats want to do is to delay the process and hope they win coming mid term elections so they can stall the process. Target market for all this garbage is white women. So Trump should give them a white woman and let the Democrats go after her...
Saturday Night Live's take on the circus barely comes close to the real thing. :D
All that garbage from Dr. Ford is derived from a book Judge wrote but let's face all the Democrats want to do is to delay the process and hope they win coming mid term elections so they can stall the process. Target market for all this garbage is white women. So Trump should give them a white woman and let the Democrats go after her...
It goes without saying the Democrats want to stop him and prevent Trump from making any future appointments. A sort of payback, if not enough, for what the Republicans did under Obama.
That aside, Kavanaugh is anything but the image of the innocent alter boy he claims to be. He lies about obvious things. And there is a demonstrable paper trail of his lies under oath even for previous appointments.
Dr. Ford's garbage is not corroborated. Having seen her testimony, I am sure dishonesty on her part is not one of the reasons it's not corroborated. She wouldn't be the first victim to come forth without a demonstrable trail of evidence. It's a sad aspect of these types of crimes. I thought her garbage was more convincing(much more so) than Kavanaugh's petulant histrionics.
Dr. Ford's garbage is not corroborated. Having seen her testimony, I am sure dishonesty on her part is not one of the reasons it's not corroborated. She wouldn't be the first victim to come forth without a demonstrable trail of evidence. It's a sad aspect of these types of crimes. I thought her garbage was more convincing(much more so) than Kavanaugh's petulant histrionics.Termi, I don't think Dr. Ford is lying either. She didn't strike me as a sociopath. That's why I thought this was a bad memory especially given how little else she remembers. I have experienced something worse than the kind of assault she described and I really don't believe in 50 years I can forget where. I was a kid (I mean a child, not 15) and I can take you to the place it happened, right to the front door. I do think trauma can cause you to block stuff out, but I also think it's possible she may be mistaken on the identity of the perp, given the person she claimed broke it up (rescued her) cannot recall such a thing (Unless he's also lying).
Why are Catholics rooting for a historical sex offender? Methinks its out of shame. They have historical offenders up their sleeves and they hope to pain such ancient narratives as unreliable .....may help them at some point in getting away with their old crimesBigots always expose themselves. Like clock work. It's never an individual, everything has to be filtered through the lens of one's favorite hated group. Look here, genius, if Trump withdraws Kavanaugh, he'll replace him with a traditionalist catholic woman with 7 kids whom conservatives wanted over Kavanaugh the first time around because of her much clearer anti Roe v Wade stance compared to Kavanaugh. Catholics are already calling for that replacement, but why bother with information when prejudice suffices, lol. Not everyone is born with your mindset, so don't project yourself onto everyone tafasari.
Dr. Ford's garbage is not corroborated. Having seen her testimony, I am sure dishonesty on her part is not one of the reasons it's not corroborated. She wouldn't be the first victim to come forth without a demonstrable trail of evidence. It's a sad aspect of these types of crimes. I thought her garbage was more convincing(much more so) than Kavanaugh's petulant histrionics.Termi, I don't think Dr. Ford is lying either. She didn't strike me as a sociopath. That's why I thought this was a bad memory especially given how little else she remembers. I have experienced something worse than the kind of assault she described and I really don't believe in 50 years I can forget where. I was a kid (I mean a child, not 15) and I can take you to the place it happened, right to the front door. I do think trauma can cause you to block stuff out, but I also think it's possible she may be mistaken on the identity of the perp, given the person she claimed broke it up (rescued her) cannot recall such a thing (Unless he's also lying).
Dr. Ford's garbage is not corroborated. Having seen her testimony, I am sure dishonesty on her part is not one of the reasons it's not corroborated. She wouldn't be the first victim to come forth without a demonstrable trail of evidence. It's a sad aspect of these types of crimes. I thought her garbage was more convincing(much more so) than Kavanaugh's petulant histrionics.Termi, I don't think Dr. Ford is lying either. She didn't strike me as a sociopath. That's why I thought this was a bad memory especially given how little else she remembers. I have experienced something worse than the kind of assault she described and I really don't believe in 50 years I can forget where. I was a kid (I mean a child, not 15) and I can take you to the place it happened, right to the front door. I do think trauma can cause you to block stuff out, but I also think it's possible she may be mistaken on the identity of the perp, given the person she claimed broke it up (rescued her) cannot recall such a thing (Unless he's also lying).
I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
About Mark Judge's testimony, perhaps he has a reason to lie, but even her best friend denies the whole thing while supporting Dr. Ford. I just don't see enough here to ruin this man. And don't you think the alcohol in her system makes her recollections more doubtful rather than support their accuracy?
Why are Catholics rooting for a historical sex offender? Methinks its out of shame. They have historical offenders up their sleeves and they hope to pain such ancient narratives as unreliable .....may help them at some point in getting away with their old crimesBigots always expose themselves. Like clock work. It's never an individual, everything has to be filtered through the lens of one's favorite hated group. Look here, genius, if Trump withdraws Kavanaugh, he'll replace him with a traditionalist catholic woman with 7 kids whom conservatives wanted over Kavanaugh the first time around because of her much clearer anti Roe v Wade stance compared to Kavanaugh. Catholics are already calling for that replacement, but why bother with information when prejudice suffices, lol. Not everyone is born with your mindset, so don't project yourself onto everyone tafasari.
I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
Or it could be for the greater good. Get a pervert in so long as he deals with the problems of homosexuality and abortion
Judge Kavanaugh is a sociopath. You will encounter this kid of A personality types in USA a lot and after a decades of being among Americans you are able to pick sociopaths like Brett...Brett ambition is all has been driving him since teenage years. His friends have to deny this until they are under oath. It serious to acknowledge something like this in these times we are living in
He is done. Right is a dead in the eyes of many..
21/ Here we have more CORROBORATION via a Kavanaugh *deception*. Ed Whelan, working apparently with the White House and Kavanaugh—indirectly, if not directly—tried to convince America that Chris Garrett assaulted Ford *without revealing that Garrett was going out with Ford then*.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 1, 2018
Desperado. Who cares what the institution is cheering? This discussion is about Kavanaugh. Catholics can handle sexual abuse along with the equally rotten evangelical churches in the US. Who are also behind Kavanaugh, pastor who cares about Christians supporting sex abusers, lol. Sema hypocrisy.Why are Catholics rooting for a historical sex offender? Methinks its out of shame. They have historical offenders up their sleeves and they hope to pain such ancient narratives as unreliable .....may help them at some point in getting away with their old crimesBigots always expose themselves. Like clock work. It's never an individual, everything has to be filtered through the lens of one's favorite hated group. Look here, genius, if Trump withdraws Kavanaugh, he'll replace him with a traditionalist catholic woman with 7 kids whom conservatives wanted over Kavanaugh the first time around because of her much clearer anti Roe v Wade stance compared to Kavanaugh. Catholics are already calling for that replacement, but why bother with information when prejudice suffices, lol. Not everyone is born with your mindset, so don't project yourself onto everyone tafasari.
There are enough Catholics in SCOTUS so its not about the fai t of the judges. An institution that is dealing with tens of old crimes of similar nature is not going to cheer his crucifixion
Right. And some already are calling for that. vooke is only concerned with Catholics and their stance. Why doesn't the stance of his co-religionists concern him? Please lets see the outrage for the Osteens and Franklins and Hagees and all the rest of them. After all, they are interested in getting a pervert in as long as he deals with homosexuality and abortion, which really worries vooke, lol. Bwana Pharisee, lets see your outrage for this travesty :D.I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
Or it could be for the greater good. Get a pervert in so long as he deals with the problems of homosexuality and abortion
There is a long list of equally scary candidates minus the baggage, prepared by the Federalist Society, that they can fall back on though.
Right. And some already are calling for that. vooke is only concerned with Catholics and their stance. Why doesn't the stance of his co-religionists concern him? Please lets see the outrage for the Osteens and Franklins and Hagees and all the rest of them. After all, they are interested in getting a pervert in as long as he deals with homosexuality and abortion, which really worries vooke, lol. Bwana Pharisee, lets see your outrage for this travesty :D .I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
Or it could be for the greater good. Get a pervert in so long as he deals with the problems of homosexuality and abortion
There is a long list of equally scary candidates minus the baggage, prepared by the Federalist Society, that they can fall back on though.
Evangelicals have more sway on who gets nominated than any Catholic precisely because Catholics don't vote as a block. Trump has an advisory committee made of Evangelical preachers, it's with THEM (not with catholics) that he made a deal about judges he was going to nominate. They are a powerful lobby in the Trump era. Just FYI for people not transparently out for sheer primitive tribalism mascarading as concern for sexual assault.
Desperado. Who cares what the institution is cheering? This discussion is about Kavanaugh. Catholics can handle sexual abuse along with the equally rotten evangelical churches in the US. Who are also behind Kavanaugh, pastor who cares about Christians supporting sex abusers, lol. Sema hypocrisy.Why are Catholics rooting for a historical sex offender? Methinks its out of shame. They have historical offenders up their sleeves and they hope to pain such ancient narratives as unreliable .....may help them at some point in getting away with their old crimesBigots always expose themselves. Like clock work. It's never an individual, everything has to be filtered through the lens of one's favorite hated group. Look here, genius, if Trump withdraws Kavanaugh, he'll replace him with a traditionalist catholic woman with 7 kids whom conservatives wanted over Kavanaugh the first time around because of her much clearer anti Roe v Wade stance compared to Kavanaugh. Catholics are already calling for that replacement, but why bother with information when prejudice suffices, lol. Not everyone is born with your mindset, so don't project yourself onto everyone tafasari.
There are enough Catholics in SCOTUS so its not about the fai t of the judges. An institution that is dealing with tens of old crimes of similar nature is not going to cheer his crucifixion
Right. And some already are calling for that. vooke is only concerned with Catholics and their stance. Why doesn't the stance of his co-religionists concern him? Please lets see the outrage for the Osteens and Franklins and Hagees and all the rest of them. After all, they are interested in getting a pervert in as long as he deals with homosexuality and abortion, which really worries vooke, lol. Bwana Pharisee, lets see your outrage for this travesty :D .I havent checked the polls on that basis. Still I could see them rooting for him, because they are, mostly, Republican leaning and thus Trump supporters. As opposed to lovers of sex offenders who I think they would rather not elevate to visibility, especially given their churchs history and young lads.
Or it could be for the greater good. Get a pervert in so long as he deals with the problems of homosexuality and abortion
There is a long list of equally scary candidates minus the baggage, prepared by the Federalist Society, that they can fall back on though.
Evangelicals have more sway on who gets nominated than any Catholic precisely because Catholics don't vote as a block. Trump has an advisory committee made of Evangelical preachers, it's with THEM (not with catholics) that he made a deal about judges he was going to nominate. They are a powerful lobby in the Trump era. Just FYI for people not transparently out for sheer primitive tribalism mascarading as concern for sexual assault.
vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
I dont for a second think they are blinded by his faith. Im saying they are primarily fixated by the common thread between Kavanaughs and their history of sex abuse, and then of course by this other agendas of homosexuality and abortion. But these agendas can be fixed by anyone readily conservative. So I think its Catholicism history of sex abuse that makes them completely blind to Kavanaughs undeniable teenage indiscretions.What blinds Evangelicals? I've seen more impressive yearns woven on these board, this is plain silly.
Honest people care about vooke's hypocrisy.Desperado. Who cares what the institution is cheering? This discussion is about Kavanaugh. Catholics can handle sexual abuse along with the equally rotten evangelical churches in the US. Who are also behind Kavanaugh, pastor who cares about Christians supporting sex abusers, lol. Sema hypocrisy.Why are Catholics rooting for a historical sex offender? Methinks its out of shame. They have historical offenders up their sleeves and they hope to pain such ancient narratives as unreliable .....may help them at some point in getting away with their old crimesBigots always expose themselves. Like clock work. It's never an individual, everything has to be filtered through the lens of one's favorite hated group. Look here, genius, if Trump withdraws Kavanaugh, he'll replace him with a traditionalist catholic woman with 7 kids whom conservatives wanted over Kavanaugh the first time around because of her much clearer anti Roe v Wade stance compared to Kavanaugh. Catholics are already calling for that replacement, but why bother with information when prejudice suffices, lol. Not everyone is born with your mindset, so don't project yourself onto everyone tafasari.
There are enough Catholics in SCOTUS so its not about the fai t of the judges. An institution that is dealing with tens of old crimes of similar nature is not going to cheer his crucifixion
Intelligent people care about Catholic hypocrisy
I dont for a second think they are blinded by his faith. Im saying they are primarily fixated by the common thread between Kavanaughs and their history of sex abuse, and then of course by this other agendas of homosexuality and abortion. But these agendas can be fixed by anyone readily conservative. So I think its Catholicism history of sex abuse that makes them completely blind to Kavanaughs undeniable teenage indiscretions.What blinds Evangelicals? I've seen more impressive yearns woven on these board, this is plain silly.
vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.He is a bigot, with a very consistent track record, don't spin for him, Terminator.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.He is a bigot, with a very consistent track record, don't spin for him, Terminator.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
Yes, especially in the last few years since Black lives matter, White Catholics have become Republicans first and Catholic second. There used to be differences politically between them and Evangelicals but they have vanished. They are locked with Reps on everything even those explicitly taught against by their church.
How confident are you of that proposition? 8)I dont for a second think they are blinded by his faith. Im saying they are primarily fixated by the common thread between Kavanaughs and their history of sex abuse, and then of course by this other agendas of homosexuality and abortion. But these agendas can be fixed by anyone readily conservative. So I think its Catholicism history of sex abuse that makes them completely blind to Kavanaughs undeniable teenage indiscretions.What blinds Evangelicals? I've seen more impressive yearns woven on these board, this is plain silly.
Everything that blinds Catholics minus a shared sex abuse coverup history
It's not name-calling when it's factual. Even your introduction of catholics as a group into a discussion on Kavanaugh testifies. If you don't like it, you can change your consistent bigotry, evident on this board for years.vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.He is a bigot, with a very consistent track record, don't spin for him, Terminator.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
Yes, especially in the last few years since Black lives matter, White Catholics have become Republicans first and Catholic second. There used to be differences politically between them and Evangelicals but they have vanished. They are locked with Reps on everything even those explicitly taught against by their church.
You know calling me names does change facts,right?
How confident are you of that proposition? 8)I dont for a second think they are blinded by his faith. Im saying they are primarily fixated by the common thread between Kavanaughs and their history of sex abuse, and then of course by this other agendas of homosexuality and abortion. But these agendas can be fixed by anyone readily conservative. So I think its Catholicism history of sex abuse that makes them completely blind to Kavanaughs undeniable teenage indiscretions.What blinds Evangelicals? I've seen more impressive yearns woven on these board, this is plain silly.
Everything that blinds Catholics minus a shared sex abuse coverup history
It's not name-calling when it's factual. Even your introduction of catholics as a group into a discussion on Kavanaugh testifies. If you don't like it, you can change your consistent bigotry, evident on this board for years.vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.He is a bigot, with a very consistent track record, don't spin for him, Terminator.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
Yes, especially in the last few years since Black lives matter, White Catholics have become Republicans first and Catholic second. There used to be differences politically between them and Evangelicals but they have vanished. They are locked with Reps on everything even those explicitly taught against by their church.
You know calling me names does change facts,right?
And there we have it. Where is this defence? When did I propose to make it? Evangelicals are not one bit better in sexual abuse of children, but just like you don't care about their support of Kavanaugh, I'm sure you don't care about that either. You saw kadame post and decided it was time to force a debate on catholicism. With a psychic conspiracy theory to boot, lol.How confident are you of that proposition? 8)
More than you can confidently defend Catholicism
Soon as you tell me why evangelicals are, our local pharisee.
Dont stop, now focus on Catholicism rooting for a pervert and tell me why they are so obstinate
vooke has a bulls-eye on Catholic institutions and anything that bears a remote association :D . Obviously Catholics(at least the white ones) in the US overlook a lot of bad things that the GOP promotes like racism.He is a bigot, with a very consistent track record, don't spin for him, Terminator.
But I don't buy the idea that they are behind Kavanaugh for his religion. "Pro-life" is just something on the GOP platform that a lot of them can use to justify their tolerance of this party's intolerance without looking bad.
Yes, especially in the last few years since Black lives matter, White Catholics have become Republicans first and Catholic second. There used to be differences politically between them and Evangelicals but they have vanished. They are locked with Reps on everything even those explicitly taught against by their church.
And there we have it. Where is this defence? When did I propose to make it? Evangelicals are not one bit better in sexual abuse of children, but just like you don't care about their support of Kavanaugh, I'm sure you don't care about that either. You saw kadame post and decided it was time to force a debate on catholicism. With a psychic conspiracy theory to boot, lol.How confident are you of that proposition? 8)
More than you can confidently defend Catholicism
Soon as you tell me why evangelicals are, our local pharisee.
Dont stop, now focus on Catholicism rooting for a pervert and tell me why they are so obstinate
Here's you silly answer. Lets see how concerned you really are about sex abuse and its cover-up in churches. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/31/feature/the-epidemic-of-denial-about-sexual-abuse-in-the-evangelical-church/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7704d0f9e9f6
Silly questions deserve silly answers. Im not going to wrack my brains over nothing
Here's you silly answer. Lets see how concerned you really are about sex abuse and its cover-up in churches. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/31/feature/the-epidemic-of-denial-about-sexual-abuse-in-the-evangelical-church/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7704d0f9e9f6
Silly questions deserve silly answers. Im not going to wrack my brains over nothing
The idea that I should tell you why catholics as a group are obstinate about Kavanaugh is more typical bigotry. You want to know about my stance? You can read it. When you feel confident about explaining evangelicals as a group you can come back with more primitive questions about why a group has done something.
My last point on this religious tangent. It's remarkable actually, that the first(and to date only) Catholic President was JFK. A Democrat(though then the parties were still in some sort of flux). But JFK was from Massachusetts, a state with liberal values, and so a leftist who forced the south to obey school desegregation laws. His brother Ted the senator, was also strong on liberal values like minority rights. Also, at least in big cities, Catholics tend to be Irish, Italians, Polish etc and liberal.It's my understanding that there was a time Jews and those Catholic groups were not considered properly 'White'. It took a while for them to become so. America is Proestant White country, so Catholics and Jews were outsiders in their own way. Something has happened. That divide no longer exists or it doesn't matter. I've seen devout Catholics defend child-separation policy at the border. I mean deeply devout catholics. I'm p. sure this would not have happened 7 years ago, or perhaps I just used to be naive about racism before I moved into the West. Still, whatever was there before, something else has happened.
So the GOP leaning is not so obvious, until you actually take statistics for the whole country. At that point, you get the Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum types.
More psychic work from you? Lol. Its worse among evangelicals who have no means of co-ordinating reporting and changing policy on a wide scale, but keep up with the comforting assumptions, lol.Here's you silly answer. Lets see how concerned you really are about sex abuse and its cover-up in churches. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/31/feature/the-epidemic-of-denial-about-sexual-abuse-in-the-evangelical-church/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7704d0f9e9f6
Silly questions deserve silly answers. Im not going to wrack my brains over nothing
The idea that I should tell you why catholics as a group are obstinate about Kavanaugh is more typical bigotry. You want to know about my stance? You can read it. When you feel confident about explaining evangelicals as a group you can come back with more primitive questions about why a group has done something.
Catholicism takes the largest share of this disease.
I hadn't put him there yet on the sociopath path, but in retrospect, he might indeed be.
If you read Seth Abramson's take on his corroboration twitter thread, you'll notice that he(or at least people he is working very closely with) put out a mistaken identity narrative trying to lay the blame on "Squi", one of his own buddies, and someone who was going out with Dr. Ford at the time. That moves the needle for the assault, for me, from possible, to probable.21/ Here we have more CORROBORATION via a Kavanaugh *deception*. Ed Whelan, working apparently with the White House and Kavanaugh—indirectly, if not directly—tried to convince America that Chris Garrett assaulted Ford *without revealing that Garrett was going out with Ford then*.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 1, 2018
Obama unmasked the underbelly. But like I have mentioned elsewhere, if you try to understand American politics, devoid of the desire to "keep the black man in his place", it will appear very cryptic indeed.My last point on this religious tangent. It's remarkable actually, that the first(and to date only) Catholic President was JFK. A Democrat(though then the parties were still in some sort of flux). But JFK was from Massachusetts, a state with liberal values, and so a leftist who forced the south to obey school desegregation laws. His brother Ted the senator, was also strong on liberal values like minority rights. Also, at least in big cities, Catholics tend to be Irish, Italians, Polish etc and liberal.It's my understanding that there was a time Jews and those Catholic groups were not considered properly 'White'. It took a while for them to become so. America is Proestant White country, so Catholics and Jews were outsiders in their own way. Something has happened. That divide no longer exists or it doesn't matter. I've seen devout Catholics defend child-separation policy at the border. I mean deeply devout catholics. I'm p. sure this would not have happened 7 years ago, or perhaps I just used to be naive about racism before I moved into the West. Still, whatever was there before, something else has happened.
So the GOP leaning is not so obvious, until you actually take statistics for the whole country. At that point, you get the Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum types.
More psychic work from you? Lol. Its worse among evangelicals who have no means of co-ordinating reporting and changing policy on a wide scale, but keep up with the comforting assumptions, lol.Here's you silly answer. Lets see how concerned you really are about sex abuse and its cover-up in churches. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/31/feature/the-epidemic-of-denial-about-sexual-abuse-in-the-evangelical-church/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7704d0f9e9f6
Silly questions deserve silly answers. Im not going to wrack my brains over nothing
The idea that I should tell you why catholics as a group are obstinate about Kavanaugh is more typical bigotry. You want to know about my stance? You can read it. When you feel confident about explaining evangelicals as a group you can come back with more primitive questions about why a group has done something.
Catholicism takes the largest share of this disease.
I hadn't put him there yet on the sociopath path, but in retrospect, he might indeed be.
If you read Seth Abramson's take on his corroboration twitter thread, you'll notice that he(or at least people he is working very closely with) put out a mistaken identity narrative trying to lay the blame on "Squi", one of his own buddies, and someone who was going out with Dr. Ford at the time. That moves the needle for the assault, for me, from possible, to probable.21/ Here we have more CORROBORATION via a Kavanaugh *deception*. Ed Whelan, working apparently with the White House and Kavanaugh—indirectly, if not directly—tried to convince America that Chris Garrett assaulted Ford *without revealing that Garrett was going out with Ford then*.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 1, 2018
I guess the point here is, if I am claiming I barely know someone, and that I definitely did not assault them, what is the point of suggesting that Squi likely did it, other than to provide possible deniability in case my cover is blown?
Truth is hard to come by in these streets...so Ford was going out with squi, who was at the party but left his buddies Judge and Kavanaugh sexually assault his squeeze and never raised hell or care how his ngaofled got home?
Dr Ford is lying, lying through her teeth with that fake 3yr old voice...I guess the point here is, if I am claiming I barely know someone, and that I definitely did not assault them, what is the point of suggesting that Squi likely did it, other than to provide possible deniability in case my cover is blown?
Truth is hard to come by in these streets...so Ford was going out with squi, who was at the party but left his buddies Judge and Kavanaugh sexually assault his squeeze and never raised hell or care how his ngaofled got home?
Dr Ford is lying, lying through her teeth with that fake 3yr old voice...I hadn't put him there yet on the sociopath path, but in retrospect, he might indeed be.
If you read Seth Abramson's take on his corroboration twitter thread, you'll notice that he(or at least people he is working very closely with) put out a mistaken identity narrative trying to lay the blame on "Squi", one of his own buddies, and someone who was going out with Dr. Ford at the time. That moves the needle for the assault, for me, from possible, to probable.21/ Here we have more CORROBORATION via a Kavanaugh *deception*. Ed Whelan, working apparently with the White House and Kavanaugh—indirectly, if not directly—tried to convince America that Chris Garrett assaulted Ford *without revealing that Garrett was going out with Ford then*.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 1, 2018
I guess the point here is, if I am claiming I barely know someone, and that I definitely did not assault them, what is the point of suggesting that Squi likely did it, other than to provide possible deniability in case my cover is blown?
Termie,She said he said is guaranteed, because they won't make relevant witnesses(both corroborating and exonerating) show up and be questioned. They literally don't want to know the truth. It's bad political optics. As for Rachel Mitchell, it's not surprising that she would exonerate Kavanaugh. That is her job. She is not neutral. I don't think any sensible person was waiting for her to tell them what did or did not happen.
Forget about the July 1st entry
Rachel Mitchell tears Ford apart.
And while I think she could have similarly destroyed Kavanaugh, theres lots of believable points
How could she recall the number of beers she took while forgetting how she got there,how she got home after that or who invited her etc? She is not permitted to have been drunk if she is to be credible.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony)
If Scribd troubles you just grab it here;
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1F-48wkMLgxvnqTeppVD8ziZooei-TtRX (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1F-48wkMLgxvnqTeppVD8ziZooei-TtRX)
Termie,She said he said is guaranteed, because they won't make relevant witnesses(both corroborating and exonerating) show up and be questioned. They literally don't want to know the truth. It's bad political optics. As for Rachel Mitchell, it's not surprising that she would exonerate Kavanaugh. That is her job. She is not neutral. I don't think any sensible person was waiting for her to tell them what did or did not happen.
Forget about the July 1st entry
Rachel Mitchell tears Ford apart.
And while I think she could have similarly destroyed Kavanaugh, theres lots of believable points
How could she recall the number of beers she took while forgetting how she got there,how she got home after that or who invited her etc? She is not permitted to have been drunk if she is to be credible.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony)
If Scribd troubles you just grab it here;
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1F-48wkMLgxvnqTeppVD8ziZooei-TtRX (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1F-48wkMLgxvnqTeppVD8ziZooei-TtRX)
They wouldn't have brought her on if they thought she was neutral and interested in finding out anything other than their version of the truth. She was their proxy, to prevent old white men from looking bad questioning a victim. This report, is consistent with that contract. It might as well have been written and signed by Chuck Grassley. She is a prop.
This particular case has nothing approaching a smoking gun. Everybody agrees with that. I have heard that, contrary to popular belief, most such cases don't. Sex assault is one of the more private crimes. You are left to rely on peripheral things like who is credible and who tells lies at every potentially adverse mention and indirect corroboration, who has the most to gain/lose etc.
Of course she is biased but we would be naive to pretend that Ford has no agenda of her own. Her act was highly polished like she was determined to be believed and not just confront her abuser. If we can look beyond her motives and focus on facts such as her account matching Brett's calendar, then we should give Mitchell the same benefit of doubt
I read Mitchell's memo and what came out was Ford's moving testimony is not exactly watertight as I had thought. I was not keen piecing up all the trinklets she dropped along her way to the hearing so I'm getting them first from Mitchell.
WASHINGTON In the days leading up to a public allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate, the judge and his team were communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim, according to text messages obtained by NBC News.
Kerry Berchem, who was at Yale with both Kavanaugh and his accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has tried to get those messages to the FBI for its newly reopened investigation into the matter but says she has yet to be contacted by the bureau.
Seems guys hated this Kavanaugh in college thus more mates will emerge with all sort of stories to get back at him - quite he was/is white. They will smear him. Science has shown that witnesses recollections even hours later are largely useless bullshit and when over-relied they send clueless innocent guys into jail. But in times of moral panic times believe the victim and memory reigns supreme nonsense will destroy you in court of public opinion.Record keeping in USA is impecable. A report filed in 1965 is still in police records.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/36493/5-signs-youre-midst-moral-panic-ashe-schow
These cases being filed after decades will definitely work against the victims of rape as powerful conservative men start fighting back.
Apparently Kavanaugh knew about the Debra Ramirez dick-slapping allegations before they were made public. Not just that but he also exchanged messages with potential witnesses on how to counter them. Then he lied to Congress under oath that he only learned about them when they were reported in the New Yorker.Yeah this caught my attention. Would change the story for me. But I understand he already said on September 25th that he had heard from classmates that Ramirez was going round classmates asking them to remember the event and that he thought it was trying to implant false memories in an ochestrated hit. So, a discrepancy sure. But when I first heard it I thought of a more damning scenario than that. I thought it was Kavanaugh's own messages. But it's messages between two of his classmates who were friends with both him and Ramirez. One of them says to the other that Bret has asked her to publicly defend him. Another mentions that she's in contact with Bret's guys. That gives a slightly different picture than you first get when you hear of exchanged text messages and talking to witnesses. I've heard of one where he was looking for a photo from a decade before showing him and Ramirez and one of the ladies says to him she remember Ramirez being scared of him. I'm not sure if that part includes Kavanaugh's own text messages. The NBC has the texts, though, I hope they publish them. Would be very interesting. http://uk.businessinsider.com/did-brett-kavanaugh-commit-perjury-testimony-new-yorker-article-deborah-ramirez-2018-10?r=US&IR=TQuoteWASHINGTON In the days leading up to a public allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate, the judge and his team were communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim, according to text messages obtained by NBC News.
Kerry Berchem, who was at Yale with both Kavanaugh and his accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has tried to get those messages to the FBI for its newly reopened investigation into the matter but says she has yet to be contacted by the bureau.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/mutual-friend-ramirez-kavanaugh-anxious-come-forward-evidence-n915566
The thing is, though, it's not exactly the same. In those decades old clergy abuse cases, you find the victim complained to someone at or near the time it happened and was suppressed or not believed. The difficulty with Dr. Ford's case is that the very first time someone else heard about it was 2012. That happens a lot because of the shame. But in those cases it's harder to prove, especially if it is a lone incident.Seems guys hated this Kavanaugh in college thus more mates will emerge with all sort of stories to get back at him - quite he was/is white. They will smear him. Science has shown that witnesses recollections even hours later are largely useless bullshit and when over-relied they send clueless innocent guys into jail. But in times of moral panic times believe the victim and memory reigns supreme nonsense will destroy you in court of public opinion.Record keeping in USA is impecable. A report filed in 1965 is still in police records.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/36493/5-signs-youre-midst-moral-panic-ashe-schow
These cases being filed after decades will definitely work against the victims of rape as powerful conservative men start fighting back.
So your argument is that all this is false? Will you say the same about catholic priests?
Of course she is biased but we would be naive to pretend that Ford has no agenda of her own. Her act was highly polished like she was determined to be believed and not just confront her abuser. If we can look beyond her motives and focus on facts such as her account matching Brett's calendar, then we should give Mitchell the same benefit of doubt
I read Mitchell's memo and what came out was Ford's moving testimony is not exactly watertight as I had thought. I was not keen piecing up all the trinklets she dropped along her way to the hearing so I'm getting them first from Mitchell.
It seems the worst Mitchell has is the fact that Ford's narrative has been told in bits and drabs. Kind of like a poor story teller. That some detail is in it now that was not in before. To me, that just makes her story that more authentic. You can add. But you cannot change. That is how truthful people generally converse. Making corrections(that do not break the narrative) on the fly. Like someone recalling an actual event. She is not averse to digging deeper into her own recollections even under interrogation on national TV.
It's pretty rich but also par for the course for Mitchell to claim Kavanaugh is exonerated. She is not just biased. She was paid to make that conclusion.
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2018-10-01/kavanaugh-college-visit-to-bar-erupted-in-fight-classmate-says-jmqwga1s?__twitter_impression=true
Of course she is biased but we would be naive to pretend that Ford has no agenda of her own. Her act was highly polished like she was determined to be believed and not just confront her abuser. If we can look beyond her motives and focus on facts such as her account matching Brett's calendar, then we should give Mitchell the same benefit of doubt
I read Mitchell's memo and what came out was Ford's moving testimony is not exactly watertight as I had thought. I was not keen piecing up all the trinklets she dropped along her way to the hearing so I'm getting them first from Mitchell.
It seems the worst Mitchell has is the fact that Ford's narrative has been told in bits and drabs. Kind of like a poor story teller. That some detail is in it now that was not in before. To me, that just makes her story that more authentic. You can add. But you cannot change. That is how truthful people generally converse. Making corrections(that do not break the narrative) on the fly. Like someone recalling an actual event. She is not averse to digging deeper into her own recollections even under interrogation on national TV.
It's pretty rich but also par for the course for Mitchell to claim Kavanaugh is exonerated. She is not just biased. She was paid to make that conclusion.
She did a good job...Mitchell that is
Yeah! she did a good job for the rethuglicans and her political career is now much brighter. Its not going to be long before we see her running for a national or state office on the rethuglican ticket. This is how political careers are built.Of course she is biased but we would be naive to pretend that Ford has no agenda of her own. Her act was highly polished like she was determined to be believed and not just confront her abuser. If we can look beyond her motives and focus on facts such as her account matching Brett's calendar, then we should give Mitchell the same benefit of doubt
I read Mitchell's memo and what came out was Ford's moving testimony is not exactly watertight as I had thought. I was not keen piecing up all the trinklets she dropped along her way to the hearing so I'm getting them first from Mitchell.
It seems the worst Mitchell has is the fact that Ford's narrative has been told in bits and drabs. Kind of like a poor story teller. That some detail is in it now that was not in before. To me, that just makes her story that more authentic. You can add. But you cannot change. That is how truthful people generally converse. Making corrections(that do not break the narrative) on the fly. Like someone recalling an actual event. She is not averse to digging deeper into her own recollections even under interrogation on national TV.
It's pretty rich but also par for the course for Mitchell to claim Kavanaugh is exonerated. She is not just biased. She was paid to make that conclusion.
She did a good job...Mitchell that is
Yeah! she did a good job for the rethuglicans and her political career is now much brighter. Its not going to be long before we see her running for a national or state office on the rethuglican ticket. This is how political careers are built.Of course she is biased but we would be naive to pretend that Ford has no agenda of her own. Her act was highly polished like she was determined to be believed and not just confront her abuser. If we can look beyond her motives and focus on facts such as her account matching Brett's calendar, then we should give Mitchell the same benefit of doubt
I read Mitchell's memo and what came out was Ford's moving testimony is not exactly watertight as I had thought. I was not keen piecing up all the trinklets she dropped along her way to the hearing so I'm getting them first from Mitchell.
It seems the worst Mitchell has is the fact that Ford's narrative has been told in bits and drabs. Kind of like a poor story teller. That some detail is in it now that was not in before. To me, that just makes her story that more authentic. You can add. But you cannot change. That is how truthful people generally converse. Making corrections(that do not break the narrative) on the fly. Like someone recalling an actual event. She is not averse to digging deeper into her own recollections even under interrogation on national TV.
It's pretty rich but also par for the course for Mitchell to claim Kavanaugh is exonerated. She is not just biased. She was paid to make that conclusion.
She did a good job...Mitchell that is
I want to see what FBI will say. Comey thinks they are disadvantaged by scope and time but they can still do something. I think their report wont be as rosy as Ford and her supporters wish. Thats what I meant by Mitchell doing a good job. I think FBI will will not differ too much from her conclusions
The rethuglicans want to have it both ways. They say they believe Ms. Ford and yet they still want to confirm Kavanagh. This is a job interview and not prosecution. If I am hiring a babysitter and someone credibly tells me that the candidate molested children 30 years ago, there is no way in hell I would hire such a person. Nobody in their right mind would.
I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.
I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.
Even if one were to find both of them credible (oxymoronic) then it should boil down to which one of two has more incentives to lie. The winner here is clearly Kavanaugh by a mile. Not only does he has more incentives to lie his, belligerent, combative-take no prisoners attitude is very consistent with a bad actor caught lying through his teeth. The contrast between Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford is so stark, its like truth and lie. His refusal to ask for the FBI investigation to clear his name was dispositive for me. There is a luo saying that loosely translates that "s/he who farted is ready to fight". Kavanough came ready to fight to the bitter end even if it meant splitting the baby into half, while Dr. Ford was literally ready to give up the baby from the time she entered the fray so long as the truth emerges by asking for more FBI investigations right away clearly not worried that the outcome. I am not therefore going to sit on the fence on this one. I give this baby to Dr. Ford.I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.
Even if one were to find both of them credible (oxymoronic) then it should boil down to which one of two has more incentives to lie. The winner here is clearly Kavanaugh by a mile. Not only does he has more incentives to lie his, belligerent, combative-take no prisoners attitude is very consistent with a bad actor caught lying through his teeth. The contrast between Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford is so stark, its like truth and lie. His refusal to ask for the FBI investigation to clear his name was dispositive for me. There is a luo saying that loosely translates that "s/he who farted is ready to fight". Kavanough came ready to fight to the bitter end even if it meant splitting the baby into half, while Dr. Ford was literally ready to give up the baby from the time she entered the fray so long as the truth emerges by asking for more FBI investigations right away clearly not worried that the outcome. I am not therefore going to sit on the fence on this one. I give this baby to Dr. Ford.I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.
Who has more incentive to lie depends on what you believe about them
If you believe Ford is just another victim traumatized who suddenly gathered courage to confront her attacker,then she has every reason to be honest several times over Kavanaugh whom you believe to be a monster.
The motive for Kavanaugh to lie is more obvious. All the motives so far ascribed to Dr. Ford for lying are bizarre, far fetched and people who believe in them also believe in UFO's. She has been investigated to death by "rethuglican opposition research brigades" and believe me, if they had anything credible on her it would be out. The rethuglicans are ten times as ruthless in their opposition research as the baddest opposition research liberal. They are mean and they take no prisoners-just look back at what the "birthers" and how they were able to convice so many of their folks that Obama was not born in the USA.
The motive for Kavanaugh to lie is more obvious. All the motives so far ascribed to Dr. Ford for lying are bizarre, far fetched and people who believe in them also believe in UFO's. She has been investigated to death by "rethuglican opposition research brigades" and believe me, if they had anything credible on her it would be out. The rethuglicans are ten times as ruthless in their opposition research as the baddest opposition research liberal. They are mean and they take no prisoners-just look back at what the "birthers" and how they were able to convice so many of their folks that Obama was not born in the USA.Even if one were to find both of them credible (oxymoronic) then it should boil down to which one of two has more incentives to lie. The winner here is clearly Kavanaugh by a mile. Not only does he has more incentives to lie his, belligerent, combative-take no prisoners attitude is very consistent with a bad actor caught lying through his teeth. The contrast between Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford is so stark, its like truth and lie. His refusal to ask for the FBI investigation to clear his name was dispositive for me. There is a luo saying that loosely translates that "s/he who farted is ready to fight". Kavanough came ready to fight to the bitter end even if it meant splitting the baby into half, while Dr. Ford was literally ready to give up the baby from the time she entered the fray so long as the truth emerges by asking for more FBI investigations right away clearly not worried that the outcome. I am not therefore going to sit on the fence on this one. I give this baby to Dr. Ford.I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.
Who has more incentive to lie depends on what you believe about them
If you believe Ford is just another victim traumatized who suddenly gathered courage to confront her attacker,then she has every reason to be honest several times over Kavanaugh whom you believe to be a monster.
/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1047293294567456770&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F36620%2Fbombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedraBREAKING: Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging: dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits. Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0
— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018
I have read a story that Dr. Ford's boyfriend from 1992 to 1998 is claiming he witnessed her preparing her friend McLean for a polygraph exam she was to take with the FBI or AG's office or something like that. He sent the letter to the Judicial Committee. Rachel Mitchell specifically asked her about that in her examination. What I find strange is the boyfriend's letter is dated 2nd October but Dr. Ford was questioned last week. Did the Republicans know about the boyfriend? That question by Mitchel seems very specific and targeted. Did the FBI therefore question both Ford and McLean in the Supplemental investigation going on right now? In other words, is this new information or a fresh arrival? He also says he found her a truthful person when they dated. Ex-sexual partners might have an axe to grind though, so their info must be taken with a grain of salt. I'm interested in when this information was found out. That'd be more interesting./photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1047293294567456770&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F36620%2Fbombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedraBREAKING: Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging: dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits. Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0
— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018
He doesnt want to be involved in this process anymore. In other words, dont cross examine me, even though I am casting aspersions on her by claiming she was honest and stealing my money in the same vein. Thats rather convenient.Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.
Also listening to the question and answer, I can tell Dr. Ford understood Mitchell to be asking if she herself had been the recipient of the tips.
MY BAD. She is asked at the very end if she herself has given tips. I can see a way or two for an innocent explanation assuming Mr. Redacted-and-dont-cross-examine-me is saying the truth.
He doesnt want to be involved in this process anymore. In other words, dont cross examine me, even though I am casting aspersions on her by claiming she was honest and stealing my money in the same vein. Thats rather convenient.Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.
Also listening to the question and answer, I can tell Dr. Ford understood Mitchell to be asking if she herself had been the recipient of the tips.
MY BAD. She is asked at the very end if she herself has given tips. I can see a way or two for an innocent explanation assuming Mr. Redacted-and-dont-cross-examine-me is saying the truth.
He doesnt want to be involved in this process anymore. In other words, dont cross examine me, even though I am casting aspersions on her by claiming she was honest and stealing my money in the same vein. Thats rather convenient.Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.
Also listening to the question and answer, I can tell Dr. Ford understood Mitchell to be asking if she herself had been the recipient of the tips.
MY BAD. She is asked at the very end if she herself has given tips. I can see a way or two for an innocent explanation assuming Mr. Redacted-and-dont-cross-examine-me is saying the truth.
They likely did. And also leaked it to the Fox News crowd which is going berserk over it. Agreed its not a relevant question in any sense beyond a gotcha type. The partisanship is heavy on both sides. But if youve watched US politics over the last decade, the GOP has abandoned even pretense of any sense of propriety.
Apparently Kavanaugh knew about the Debra Ramirez dick-slapping allegations before they were made public. Not just that but he also exchanged messages with potential witnesses on how to counter them. Then he lied to Congress under oath that he only learned about them when they were reported in the New Yorker.Yeah this caught my attention. Would change the story for me. But I understand he already said on September 25th that he had heard from classmates that Ramirez was going round classmates asking them to remember the event and that he thought it was trying to implant false memories in an ochestrated hit. So, a discrepancy sure. But when I first heard it I thought of a more damning scenario than that. I thought it was Kavanaugh's own messages. But it's messages between two of his classmates who were friends with both him and Ramirez. One of them says to the other that Bret has asked her to publicly defend him. Another mentions that she's in contact with Bret's guys. That gives a slightly different picture than you first get when you hear of exchanged text messages and talking to witnesses. I've heard of one where he was looking for a photo from a decade before showing him and Ramirez and one of the ladies says to him she remember Ramirez being scared of him. I'm not sure if that part includes Kavanaugh's own text messages. The NBC has the texts, though, I hope they publish them. Would be very interesting. http://uk.businessinsider.com/did-brett-kavanaugh-commit-perjury-testimony-new-yorker-article-deborah-ramirez-2018-10?r=US&IR=TQuoteWASHINGTON In the days leading up to a public allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate, the judge and his team were communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim, according to text messages obtained by NBC News.
Kerry Berchem, who was at Yale with both Kavanaugh and his accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has tried to get those messages to the FBI for its newly reopened investigation into the matter but says she has yet to be contacted by the bureau.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/mutual-friend-ramirez-kavanaugh-anxious-come-forward-evidence-n915566
Republicans will be in a read pickle going forward. They have lost white suburban women. They have lost young people less than 50 years. What happens is that Donald trump is imploding gop from within
I have been seeing reports that the FBI has released a report. It appears they did this before interviewing Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford among others. DCI did a better job investigating Yebei, Jacob Juma, Msando murders.
Granted, this FBI background investigation is not the usual FBI investigation. The White House(Trump) in this case is a client of the FBI, and therefore has a say in what they can or cannot look at. They cannot really push back or ignore their client's constraints.
So we are back to square A. I don't believe a more thorough investigation would get us any information beyond the confirmation(for anyone still doubting) that Kavanaugh is a liar. And that could be one reason they were not asked to question him, because he would have been forced to lie to the FBI, a very serious offence.
It seems the ball is back in Jeff Flake's(and the Republican women senators) hands. Are they going to vote yes, because the FBI investigation, however flawed, now gives them cover?
That story by Ford's ex BF has done her a lot of damage. I don't think she's going to recover from it. In fact, the FBI report would be incomplete if it does not recommend prosecution. Monica MacLean has not helped matters.
Once Kava lands in the SCOTUS, Papa Sirandula will engage forward gear to execute the evil agenda of global domination. it will not be sweet.
Termi, this is looking more and more like the machinations and typical corruption of the same DNC establishment that underhandedly denied Bernie the ticket and cost them the 2016 election. Dr. Ford's best friend, the one Ford said was at the party where she was assaulted, told the FBI that McLean (or Dr. Ford's so-called 'allies') pressured her to change her story. McLean is the lady purportedly trained for a polygraph by Dr. Ford back in 1998, per the ex-boyfriend's testimony. By the way McLean, who has worked for the FBI before, categorically denied in a statement yesterday that she has ever been helped to take a polygraph. The pressure story is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152
Maybe it's not the DNC, but besides them, I don't know who else would be behind this. Now I understand why the Republicans don't seem to have a direct animus with Dr. Ford and keep insisting that she was used.
Edit! Never mind, it's Republican click bait. They are just referring to mutual friends, not FBI people.
It's possible Ford is saying the truth. Even GOPs admit, even Trump. But it has too many holes to be used against a court judge. If DNC wanted to nail KavaNope they should have pursued him self-confessed beer drinking. Not good for a SCOTUS judge. Ford is a tall story. Let the Jesuit go to SCOTUS so Papa Sirandula can unravel.You mean youve been doubting her?
Termi, this is looking more and more like the machinations and typical corruption of the same DNC establishment that underhandedly denied Bernie the ticket and cost them the 2016 election. Dr. Ford's best friend, the one Ford said was at the party where she was assaulted, told the FBI that McLean (or Dr. Ford's so-called 'allies') pressured her to change her story. McLean is the lady purportedly trained for a polygraph by Dr. Ford back in 1998, per the ex-boyfriend's testimony. By the way McLean, who has worked for the FBI before, categorically denied in a statement yesterday that she has ever been helped to take a polygraph. The pressure story is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152)
Maybe it's not the DNC, but besides them, I don't know who else would be behind this. Now I understand why the Republicans don't seem to have a direct animus with Dr. Ford and keep insisting that she was used.
Edit! Never mind, it's Republican click bait. They are just referring to mutual friends, not FBI people.
Eh, back off. If this story was what I read from the first article I saw, the DNC establishment would be the only culprit. They are very crooked and absolutely no better than Republicans. I dislike them a great deal. I like the people I've discovered are the genuine Democrats, who follow principles geared towards the common good, who are hated by both Dem/Rep establishment. The DNC together with their biased media created the Trump presidency, if you didn't know, and then they act like they were robbed when if they had just done things right (Not steal from Bernie, not collude with corrupt Hillary to prop up Trump with free airtime in hopes that he would be the easy-to-beat Republican candidate) the world would never have known the modern alt-right resurgence, the silly president, the anti-immigration laws and everything else that has come with Trump. I give them a full 50% of the blame. I can't wait for their base to get so incensed and fed up with them that they replace them ALL with people like Alexandria Cortez.Termi, this is looking more and more like the machinations and typical corruption of the same DNC establishment that underhandedly denied Bernie the ticket and cost them the 2016 election. Dr. Ford's best friend, the one Ford said was at the party where she was assaulted, told the FBI that McLean (or Dr. Ford's so-called 'allies') pressured her to change her story. McLean is the lady purportedly trained for a polygraph by Dr. Ford back in 1998, per the ex-boyfriend's testimony. By the way McLean, who has worked for the FBI before, categorically denied in a statement yesterday that she has ever been helped to take a polygraph. The pressure story is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152
Maybe it's not the DNC, but besides them, I don't know who else would be behind this. Now I understand why the Republicans don't seem to have a direct animus with Dr. Ford and keep insisting that she was used.
Edit! Never mind, it's Republican click bait. They are just referring to mutual friends, not FBI people.
What a spin. You are really trying to weave all matters conspiracy...Kavaugh is an ego maniac former footballer and a drunk. He has spent the 20 years lobbying for power. His motivation is clear to use this power to advance and impose his own views on others.
Eh, back off. If this story was what I read from the first article I saw, the DNC establishment would be the only culprit. They are very crooked and absolutely no better than Republicans. I dislike them a great deal. I like the people I've discovered are the genuine Democrats, who follow principles geared towards the common good, who are hated by both Dem/Rep establishment. The DNC together with their biased media created the Trump presidency, if you didn't know, and then they act like they were robbed when if they had just done things right (Not steal from Bernie, not collude with corrupt Hillary to prop up Trump with free airtime in hopes that he would be the easy-to-beat Republican candidate) the world would never have known the modern alt-right resurgence, the silly president, the anti-immigration laws and everything else that has come with Trump. I give them a full 50% of the blame. I can't wait for their base to get so incensed and fed up with them that they replace them ALL with people like Alexandria Cortez.Termi, this is looking more and more like the machinations and typical corruption of the same DNC establishment that underhandedly denied Bernie the ticket and cost them the 2016 election. Dr. Ford's best friend, the one Ford said was at the party where she was assaulted, told the FBI that McLean (or Dr. Ford's so-called 'allies') pressured her to change her story. McLean is the lady purportedly trained for a polygraph by Dr. Ford back in 1998, per the ex-boyfriend's testimony. By the way McLean, who has worked for the FBI before, categorically denied in a statement yesterday that she has ever been helped to take a polygraph. The pressure story is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152
Maybe it's not the DNC, but besides them, I don't know who else would be behind this. Now I understand why the Republicans don't seem to have a direct animus with Dr. Ford and keep insisting that she was used.
Edit! Never mind, it's Republican click bait. They are just referring to mutual friends, not FBI people.
What a spin. You are really trying to weave all matters conspiracy...Kavaugh is an ego maniac former footballer and a drunk. He has spent the 20 years lobbying for power. His motivation is clear to use this power to advance and impose his own views on others.
We can argue until cows come home on how Trump got to be president but I think its a little too simplistic to blame it on DNC sideling of Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders was an outsider, and independent, and if this was the Rethuglican party or any other political party other than the big tent Democratic party, Bernie Sanders would not have been allowed to even ran. Trumpism was created by a genuine fear by white folks that they are losing their country and god given "privileges" to "outsiders" which include white women. Obama's rise to the top scared them and Trump lead the fight to "make America a white man's country again". Eventually Trumpism will loose and they know it but they want to delay that time as much as possible so that they can continue to enjoy white privilege. Remember that a black presidency was not supposed to happen until 2050 or something like that and it come too early and therefore the push back or the backlash in the name of Trump.Eh, back off. If this story was what I read from the first article I saw, the DNC establishment would be the only culprit. They are very crooked and absolutely no better than Republicans. I dislike them a great deal. I like the people I've discovered are the genuine Democrats, who follow principles geared towards the common good, who are hated by both Dem/Rep establishment. The DNC together with their biased media created the Trump presidency, if you didn't know, and then they act like they were robbed when if they had just done things right (Not steal from Bernie, not collude with corrupt Hillary to prop up Trump with free airtime in hopes that he would be the easy-to-beat Republican candidate) the world would never have known the modern alt-right resurgence, the silly president, the anti-immigration laws and everything else that has come with Trump. I give them a full 50% of the blame. I can't wait for their base to get so incensed and fed up with them that they replace them ALL with people like Alexandria Cortez.Termi, this is looking more and more like the machinations and typical corruption of the same DNC establishment that underhandedly denied Bernie the ticket and cost them the 2016 election. Dr. Ford's best friend, the one Ford said was at the party where she was assaulted, told the FBI that McLean (or Dr. Ford's so-called 'allies') pressured her to change her story. McLean is the lady purportedly trained for a polygraph by Dr. Ford back in 1998, per the ex-boyfriend's testimony. By the way McLean, who has worked for the FBI before, categorically denied in a statement yesterday that she has ever been helped to take a polygraph. The pressure story is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152
Maybe it's not the DNC, but besides them, I don't know who else would be behind this. Now I understand why the Republicans don't seem to have a direct animus with Dr. Ford and keep insisting that she was used.
Edit! Never mind, it's Republican click bait. They are just referring to mutual friends, not FBI people.
What a spin. You are really trying to weave all matters conspiracy...Kavaugh is an ego maniac former footballer and a drunk. He has spent the 20 years lobbying for power. His motivation is clear to use this power to advance and impose his own views on others.
Kichwa, even now they are STILL corrupt. Do you know how much they helped Cuomo unfairly in the New York Gubernatorial primaries against Cynthia Nixon? These guys have zero care for their base. All they have is talking points to bait people into thinking they are nice--they are not. They are not even serious about universal healthcare alone.
Being Sunday, something spiritual for the day.
1. The pope is promoting climate change laws (hoax) globally. Numerous scientific documents show the climate change hysteria to be just that. That did not stop almost 200 countries/members signing up in 2016. Calling climate change/global warning the hoax it is will almost certainly get you driven out of any meeting today. So much for science and liberty. Climate change laws will most certainly be challenged in court.
2. The pope is promoting Sunday as a day of rest globally. I recall Pastor Vooke was in a heated debate here arguing that Sunday is the new Sabbath. Protestant evangelicals who are the daughters of the pope no longer argue that they have inherited Sunday from the Catholic church which claims to have changed God's 4th commandment from Saturday to Sunday. Evangelicals now have their own reasons for worshiping on Sunday in spite of themselves. See http://www.romeschallenge.com/ (http://www.romeschallenge.com/) Evangelicals are carrying out the pope's orders expertly without even realizing it. The ultimate prize is for the so-called Blue Laws to be implemented across America. This battle will most certainly go to the courts.
Protestant evangelicals in America, following the pope's nyayo, are now calling for a Sabbath rest. Except that instead of Saturday, they are calling Sunday a "Sabbath rest". What is the Lord's day? For them, it's not Saturday as the Bible says. No more arguments about Col 2:16 or that the law was nailed to the cross. Now they want that law back but on a day of their own choosing. Joined by trade unions, they chose Sunday and they want it more than Francis. http://ldausa.org/about/ (http://ldausa.org/about/) This is a religious liberty issue and will end up in court.
3. Protestants were highly instrumental in the establishment of the liberties in the US constitution. Particularly, they were instrumental in the establishment of the separation of church and state having witnessed the horrors of the Catholic church-state in Europe. History tells us the protestants who escaped to America were categorical that the church must not interfere with the state and vice versa. This is the spirit of the first amendment and the Johnson amendment barring church organizations from politics. In return, churches receive donations without being taxed. Today, protestant evangelicals are pushing very strongly for the repeal of the Johnson amendment, and Trump is in but has failed so far. Not for lack of trying though. This will go to the courts. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-vowed-to-destroy-the-johnson-amendment-thankfully-he-has-failed/2018/02/07/3cdbce4e-0b67-11e8-95a5-c396801049ef_story.html?utm_term=.4ae1832c7de9 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-vowed-to-destroy-the-johnson-amendment-thankfully-he-has-failed/2018/02/07/3cdbce4e-0b67-11e8-95a5-c396801049ef_story.html?utm_term=.4ae1832c7de9)
4. The pope is facing one of his toughest challenges with the priest sex scandals and the Penn revelation is just a tip of the iceberg. If followed through, the compensation is enough to bankrupt Vatican not to mention loss of reputation. Francis will have to smile and kiss the earth better than John Paul to heal this wound. Already, there are cases in court.
https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2018/10/04/california-man-sues-vatican-over-priest-sex-abuse-claims/ (https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2018/10/04/california-man-sues-vatican-over-priest-sex-abuse-claims/)
https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/local/2018/10/04/oxnard-california-man-sues-vatican-alleging-priest-sex-abuse-coverup-catholic-church/1516959002/ (https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/local/2018/10/04/oxnard-california-man-sues-vatican-alleging-priest-sex-abuse-coverup-catholic-church/1516959002/)
https://ktla.com/2018/10/02/camarillo-man-sues-all-california-catholic-bishops-archdiocese-of-chicago-to-force-release-of-records-saying-he-was-abused-by-anaheim-priest/ (https://ktla.com/2018/10/02/camarillo-man-sues-all-california-catholic-bishops-archdiocese-of-chicago-to-force-release-of-records-saying-he-was-abused-by-anaheim-priest/)
In comes Kavanaugh. Evangelicals are one of Trump's strongest bases. Forget about the women vote punishing Trump. Evangelicals are it. Most evangelicals are in the red camp but even blue evangelicals will have a hard time voting down a president who has so openly supported the church. Kavanaugh will go through not so much because Dr Ford had gaping holes in her testimony but because evangelicals cannot afford to turn down Trump. Not at this time. The composition of the SCOTUS will be crucial.
Pastor Vooke, Kadame do you now see why Kavanaugh must be nominated to SCOTUS and why riots, smear campaigns, FBI investigations andeven the kitchen sink cannot stop him from becoming Hon Justice Brett Kavanaugh of the Supreme Court of the United States?