I think it was bullshit also. What they did was downright ****** and I can't defend them for it at all.


With that said, until it's proven Feinstein's office leaked it, shouldn't she get the benefit of innocent before proven guilty?

Use logic with Kavanaugh....dude has lied like a sleeping dog about his drinking, especially in regards to blacking out. Under oath. How many classmates need to come out and talk about it before logic steps in and dictate's he's way more likely to be guilty than not? He lied about boofing, devil's triangle, ralphing and the RenateAlumni. He lied while in the Bush administration about receiving stolen emails. Now there's people coming out saying he was trying to get out ahead of the Ramirez story by getting friends to go on the record defending himself.

Ford sent the letter before his nomination was made. She named him to her therapist, husband, and friends before his nomination was made. She consulted with other friends before the nomination was made. Did she magically know he was going to be a SC nominee?

Why do you think they are particularly beholden to this candidate? He's a horrible SC candidate with obviously not a very good job of vetting done(typical for this admin). He's on record as saying a sitting president shouldn't be indicted. The GOP desperately needs to sit another justice before Friday, when Gamble vs The USA is heard, which will try and strengthen the power of the presidential pardon by getting rid of double jeopardy in the case of federal/state charges.

Use logic.

That’s asking a lot of cccp.

IDC about Kav. This thread is about allegations. The way it was handled was BS. She should have shared that letter with Grassley and the Feds immediately and they could have done the background checks in private! She never named him to the therapist. She said some guy...she never said Kav. NEVER EVER to her therapist.

• In a July 6 text to the Washington Post, she said it happened in the “mid 1980s.”
• In her July 30 letter to Senator Feinstein, she said it happened in the “early 80s.”
• Her August 7 statement to the polygrapher said that it happened one “high school summer in early 80’s,” but she crossed out the word “early” for reasons she did not explain.
• A September 16 Washington Post article reported that Dr. Ford said it happened in the “summer of 1982.”
• Similarly, the September 16 article reported that notes from an individual therapy session in 2013 show her describing the assault as occurring in her “late teens.” But she told the Post and the Committee that she was 15 when the assault allegedly occurred. She has not turned over her therapy records for the Committee to review.
• While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the timeframe to a particular season and particular year
• No name was given in her 2012 marriage therapy notes.
• No name was given in her 2013 individual therapy notes.
• Dr. Ford’s husband claims to recall that she identified Judge Kavanaugh by name in 2012. At that point, Judge Kavanaugh’s name was widely reported in the press as a potential Supreme Court nominee if Governor Romney won the presidential election.
• Dr. Ford testified that she told her husband about a “sexual assault” before they were married.
• But she told the Washington Post that she informed her husband that she was the victim of “physical abuse” at the beginning of their marriage.
• She testified that, both times, she was referring to the same incident.
• She does not remember who invited her to the party or how she heard about it.
• She does not remember how she got to the party.
• She does not remember in what house the assault allegedly took place or where that house was located with any specificity.
• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.
  • She told the Washington Post that the party took place near the Columbia Country Club. The Club is more than 7 miles from her childhood home as the crow flies, and she testified that it was a roughly 20-minute drive from her childhood home.
  • She also agreed for the first time in her testimony that she was driven somewhere that night, either to the party or from the party or both.
  • Dr. Ford was able to describe hiding in the bathroom, locking the door, and subsequently exiting the house. She also described wanting to make sure that she did not look like she had been attacked.
  • But she has no memory of who drove her or when. Nor has anyone come forward to identify him or herself as the driver.
  • Given that this all took place before cell phones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy. Indeed, she stated that she ran out of the house after coming downstairs and did not state that she made a phone call from the house before she did, or that she called anyone else thereafter.
• She does, however, remember small, distinct details from the party unrelated to the assault. For example, she testified that she had exactly one beer at the party and was taking no medication at the time of the alleged assault.
• Dr. Ford has named three people other than Judge Kavanaugh who attended the party— Mark Judge, Patrick “PJ” Smyth, and her lifelong friend Leland Keyser (née Ingham). Dr. Ford testified to the Committee that another boy attended the party, but that she could not remember his name. No others have come forward.
• All three named eyewitnesses have submitted statements to the Committee denying any memory of the party whatsoever. Most relevantly, in her first statement to the Committee, Ms. Keyser stated through counsel that, “[s]imply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” In a subsequent statement to the Committee through counsel, Ms. Keyser said that “the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate [Dr. Ford’s allegations] because she has no recollection of the incident in question.”
  • Moreover, Dr. Ford testified that her friend Leland, apparently the only other girl at the party, did not follow up with Dr. Ford after the party to ask why she had suddenly disappeared.
  • According to her letter to Senator Feinstein, Dr. Ford heard Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge talking to other partygoers downstairs while she was hiding in the bathroom after the alleged assault. But according to her testimony, she could not hear them talking to anyone.
    • In her letter, she stated, “I locked the door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stairwell, at which point other persons at the house were talking with them.”
    • Kavanaugh or Mark Judge turned up the music in the bedroom so that the people downstairs could not hear her scream. She testified that, after the incident, she ran into the bathroom, locked the door, and heard them going downstairs. But she maintained that she could not hear their conversation with others when they got downstairs. Instead, she testified that she “assum[ed]” a conversation took place.
  • Her account of who was at the party has been inconsistent.
    • According to The Washington Post’s account of her therapy notes, there were four boys in the bedroom in which she was assaulted.
    • She told the Washington Post that the notes were erroneous because there were four boys at the party, but only two in the bedroom.
    • In her letter to Senator Feinstein, she said “me and 4 others” were present at the party.
    • In her testimony, she said there were four boys in addition to Leland Keyser and herself. She could not remember the name of the fourth boy, and no one has come forward.
    • Dr. Ford listed Patrick “PJ” Smyth as a “bystander” in her statement to the polygrapher and in her July 6 text to the Washington Post, although she testified that it was inaccurate to call him a bystander. She did not list Leland Keyser even though they are good friends. Leland Keyser’s presence should have been more memorable than PJ Smyth’s.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/2/2018 10:55:00 AM (view original):
That’s asking a lot of cccp.

STFU, you leftist child. Adults are speaking.

Memories from 36 years ago are a ***** to get right. Agreed.


Kavanaugh is unfit to serve on the SC because he has a history of not telling the truth, even under oath. Agreed?

Posted by all3 on 10/2/2018 9:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 10/1/2018 8:38:00 PM (view original):
All fine. Except I KNOW he's a liar. And THAT is all I've concluded so far.

I DON'T KNOW a damn thing about that night 36 years ago.
I don't need to, or (really) want to.
To ME, it's NOT even the issue.

Speaking of only taking-in the parts of things you choose, I've said that repeatedly.
Do I need to re-quote all of them?

You KNOW he's a liar? OK. You really need post nothing else, since it has zero credibility after that.
Nobody knows anyone else is a liar until it is proven. You're making assumptions and judgements. How many times do I need to post THAT? Until you stop, your hypocrisy will continue to be pointed-out.

Dude, you're NUTS! I've tried to be reasonable because on a few issues we do agree............. but are you really defending Kavanaugh's honesty during his testimony? If so, you are delusional.
The number of his classmates and friends who have already come forward to swear he lied under oath regarding his drinking habits is growing as I type this!!
Plus, I HAVE eyes and ears. IF Boris is allowed to use a "gut feeling", then I'm allowed to use my eyes and ears. I watched his testimony. It's been awhile since I witnessed anybody squirm, evade, deflect, and attack others rather than answer simple questions!

I'm waiting for the FBI investigation on all the H.S./College fratboy sex stuff. I have my suspicions but that's all they are.
As to his honesty. He's clearly a liar IMO, and if you can't see that and admit that, then I'm finished listening to YOUR opinions!

As you would have demonstrated far more blindness than I need to determine your "judgment"

The word of the week is "INCREDIBLE"

Trump's (and my) definition of Kavanaugh's testimony under OATH!
Literally NOT credible. Indeed!

In fact, I'll go farther. I believe THIS last week has been Trump's finest week in office so far!
Here's hoping he continues to use good judgment and forces Kavanaugh to remove his name from consideration.

The Country can move on. Trump can pick another candidate.
Hopefully, he'll choose more wisely!

Posted by The Taint on 10/2/2018 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Memories from 36 years ago are a ***** to get right. Agreed.


Kavanaugh is unfit to serve on the SC because he has a history of not telling the truth, even under oath. Agreed?

This is not about Kav but I would nominate someone else he is tainted (I have no idea if he is guilty, unlike idiot bad luck who believes he is omnipotent and does). My point is that neither he nor Ford are credible and she NEVER mentioned his name to her therapist, as you alleged.

But this thread is not about Kav but about allegations. IMO the accused should not have to prove a negative. There needs to be corroboration or some additional data for the accuser's claim. Otherwise men are just F*CKED.

If some whacko accused me of doing this and I categorically denied it, in the eyes of many leftists I would be guilty until proven innocent and that is utter BS. DO YOU AGREE?

Idiot, bad luck does not. Because he is an idiot.

Posted by laramiebob on 10/2/2018 11:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 10/2/2018 9:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 10/1/2018 8:38:00 PM (view original):
All fine. Except I KNOW he's a liar. And THAT is all I've concluded so far.

I DON'T KNOW a damn thing about that night 36 years ago.
I don't need to, or (really) want to.
To ME, it's NOT even the issue.

Speaking of only taking-in the parts of things you choose, I've said that repeatedly.
Do I need to re-quote all of them?

You KNOW he's a liar? OK. You really need post nothing else, since it has zero credibility after that.
Nobody knows anyone else is a liar until it is proven. You're making assumptions and judgements. How many times do I need to post THAT? Until you stop, your hypocrisy will continue to be pointed-out.

Dude, you're NUTS! I've tried to be reasonable because on a few issues we do agree............. but are you really defending Kavanaugh's honesty during his testimony? If so, you are delusional.
The number of his classmates and friends who have already come forward to swear he lied under oath regarding his drinking habits is growing as I type this!!
Plus, I HAVE eyes and ears. IF Boris is allowed to use a "gut feeling", then I'm allowed to use my eyes and ears. I watched his testimony. It's been awhile since I witnessed anybody squirm, evade, deflect, and attack others rather than answer simple questions!

I'm waiting for the FBI investigation on all the H.S./College fratboy sex stuff. I have my suspicions but that's all they are.
As to his honesty. He's clearly a liar IMO, and if you can't see that and admit that, then I'm finished listening to YOUR opinions!

As you would have demonstrated far more blindness than I need to determine your "judgment"

The word of the week is "INCREDIBLE"

Trump's (and my) definition of Kavanaugh's testimony under OATH!
Literally NOT credible. Indeed!

In fact, I'll go farther. I believe THIS last week has been Trump's finest week in office so far!
Here's hoping he continues to use good judgment and forces Kavanaugh to remove his name from consideration.

The Country can move on. Trump can pick another candidate.
Hopefully, he'll choose more wisely!

This thread is not about Kav. Is some psycho chick accuses me of this from my HS days I don't want people like you and bad luck to judge me on my body language or responses because I would be flipping out angry. Much more than Kav has shown. MUCH MORE. I would call it a witch hunt and attack the credibility of each and every accuser 100% and sue them.

You would then say I am angry so I must be guilty bt it would be total BS.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/2/2018 11:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 10/2/2018 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Memories from 36 years ago are a ***** to get right. Agreed.


Kavanaugh is unfit to serve on the SC because he has a history of not telling the truth, even under oath. Agreed?

This is not about Kav but I would nominate someone else he is tainted (I have no idea if he is guilty, unlike idiot bad luck who believes he is omnipotent and does). My point is that neither he nor Ford are credible and she NEVER mentioned his name to her therapist, as you alleged.

But this thread is not about Kav but about allegations. IMO the accused should not have to prove a negative. There needs to be corroboration or some additional data for the accuser's claim. Otherwise men are just F*CKED.

If some whacko accused me of doing this and I categorically denied it, in the eyes of many leftists I would be guilty until proven innocent and that is utter BS. DO YOU AGREE?

Idiot, bad luck does not. Because he is an idiot.

I think you could probably easily discredit any accusations against you in a court of law because you don't have a history of questionable behavior.

i also think you'd never face the accusations because from what I've "seen" of you Here, you wouldn't put yourself in compromising situations.

This whole thing isn't a criminal proceeding either. It IS about his fitness to be a SC judge.

"He lied while in the Bush administration about receiving stolen emails. Now there's people coming out saying he was trying to get out ahead of the Ramirez story by getting friends to go on the record defending himself."

Exactly! Spot on.

There is already a large "group" of text messages concerning the "Ramirez" (pecker-waving) allegations being gathered by classmates and friends of Kavanaugh where-in it is claimed that HE was reaching out to many former class members and associates of He and Ms. Ramirez and trying to get them to provide "cover" regarding Ms. Ramirez "pecker-waving" allegation. The details of the text messages originating from HIM should be quite interesting, No?

However, the BIGGER deal in this is that Kavanugh was sending these text messages BEFORE Ms. Ramirez' allegation had become public!!!
BEFORE, HE even knew She would come forward/publicly with the "memory". Which, BTW, she has ALREADY furnished the FBI investigators with a fairly long list of witnesses to the "pecker-waving" incident, and that (according to Pres. Trump) THEY (the FBI) will be allowed to interview Ms. Ramirez's corroborating witnesses to determine the accuracy of HER allegation.

I really can NOT understand how any decent person could be publicly defending this elitist liar and possible sexual nut-job.
How many times are the Republicans going to be on the wrong side of History?
Kavanaugh as a SCOTUS Justice is finished.
Does it have to hasten the end of the entire Republican Party?

THIS former Reagan/Republican says............ bring it on. The party doesn't hold ANY of the ideals Reagan stood for.
Except large Military budgets!

If he just says, yeah we were knuckleheads and drank too much in high school. I don't remember the incident but if she in any way felt threatened I truly apologize.....He's probably confirmed by now. Instead he lied and has double downed to the point of no return. Hell he even mis-lead about the drinking age in front of Congress.

Posted by The Taint on 10/2/2018 11:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/2/2018 11:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 10/2/2018 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Memories from 36 years ago are a ***** to get right. Agreed.


Kavanaugh is unfit to serve on the SC because he has a history of not telling the truth, even under oath. Agreed?

This is not about Kav but I would nominate someone else he is tainted (I have no idea if he is guilty, unlike idiot bad luck who believes he is omnipotent and does). My point is that neither he nor Ford are credible and she NEVER mentioned his name to her therapist, as you alleged.

But this thread is not about Kav but about allegations. IMO the accused should not have to prove a negative. There needs to be corroboration or some additional data for the accuser's claim. Otherwise men are just F*CKED.

If some whacko accused me of doing this and I categorically denied it, in the eyes of many leftists I would be guilty until proven innocent and that is utter BS. DO YOU AGREE?

Idiot, bad luck does not. Because he is an idiot.

I think you could probably easily discredit any accusations against you in a court of law because you don't have a history of questionable behavior.

i also think you'd never face the accusations because from what I've "seen" of you Here, you wouldn't put yourself in compromising situations.

Right. But what if some whacko chick still accuses me. I go through all your steps and eventually prove her to be false. How do I get my reputation back? My court costs? I was not an angel in HS or College. But I always had a serious GF so I was never in positions like that to your point. But what if some whacko accuses me because she has me confused with someone else.

I'd be LIVID. I think this event has set our country back and divided it even more. I am glad we can discuss this logically.

Posted by laramiebob on 10/2/2018 11:28:00 AM (view original):
"He lied while in the Bush administration about receiving stolen emails. Now there's people coming out saying he was trying to get out ahead of the Ramirez story by getting friends to go on the record defending himself."

Exactly! Spot on.

There is already a large "group" of text messages concerning the "Ramirez" (pecker-waving) allegations being gathered by classmates and friends of Kavanaugh where-in it is claimed that HE was reaching out to many former class members and associates of He and Ms. Ramirez and trying to get them to provide "cover" regarding Ms. Ramirez "pecker-waving" allegation. The details of the text messages originating from HIM should be quite interesting, No?

However, the BIGGER deal in this is that Kavanugh was sending these text messages BEFORE Ms. Ramirez' allegation had become public!!!
BEFORE, HE even knew She would come forward/publicly with the "memory". Which, BTW, she has ALREADY furnished the FBI investigators with a fairly long list of witnesses to the "pecker-waving" incident, and that (according to Pres. Trump) THEY (the FBI) will be allowed to interview Ms. Ramirez's corroborating witnesses to determine the accuracy of HER allegation.

I really can NOT understand how any decent person could be publicly defending this elitist liar and possible sexual nut-job.
How many times are the Republicans going to be on the wrong side of History?
Kavanaugh as a SCOTUS Justice is finished.
Does it have to hasten the end of the entire Republican Party?

THIS former Reagan/Republican says............ bring it on. The party doesn't hold ANY of the ideals Reagan stood for.
Except large Military budgets!

Yup, not to mention the list of 65 classmates with statements about his good character being produced the day after the Ford allegation became public. They knew it was coming.

Posted by laramiebob on 10/2/2018 11:28:00 AM (view original):
"He lied while in the Bush administration about receiving stolen emails. Now there's people coming out saying he was trying to get out ahead of the Ramirez story by getting friends to go on the record defending himself."

Exactly! Spot on.

There is already a large "group" of text messages concerning the "Ramirez" (pecker-waving) allegations being gathered by classmates and friends of Kavanaugh where-in it is claimed that HE was reaching out to many former class members and associates of He and Ms. Ramirez and trying to get them to provide "cover" regarding Ms. Ramirez "pecker-waving" allegation. The details of the text messages originating from HIM should be quite interesting, No?

However, the BIGGER deal in this is that Kavanugh was sending these text messages BEFORE Ms. Ramirez' allegation had become public!!!
BEFORE, HE even knew She would come forward/publicly with the "memory". Which, BTW, she has ALREADY furnished the FBI investigators with a fairly long list of witnesses to the "pecker-waving" incident, and that (according to Pres. Trump) THEY (the FBI) will be allowed to interview Ms. Ramirez's corroborating witnesses to determine the accuracy of HER allegation.

I really can NOT understand how any decent person could be publicly defending this elitist liar and possible sexual nut-job.
How many times are the Republicans going to be on the wrong side of History?
Kavanaugh as a SCOTUS Justice is finished.
Does it have to hasten the end of the entire Republican Party?

THIS former Reagan/Republican says............ bring it on. The party doesn't hold ANY of the ideals Reagan stood for.
Except large Military budgets!

The thread is not about Kav.