Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Elections have consequences libbies, the supreme will be conservative for the next decade plus. Whether with Kavanaugh or Barrett or Kethledge the seat is ours to fill. Had your candidate won in 2016 the conservatives would be on the ropes and facing a 6-3 liberal court. Huge swing!!
And you’re still the person who claims that girls/women who are raped should take comfort in the fact that their rapists found them “desirable”. That’s not something that a normal, well-adjusted human expresses.
So you believe a tweet instead of believing Dr Ford under oath. I guess you’ll find anything to discredit her because you find Kavanaugh such an upstanding citizen
I do believe a Tweet over Dr Ford but it's the letter contained in the Tweet that I really believe.
It is just a letter so far, have seen nothing that verifies the person who wrote it as being who he said he was.
None of it means anything unless the statement is under Oath of Felony (not that any of that bothers Leftist Media) ...... it's still not worth anything - even under Oath IF they just shrug their shoulders and let it go if the person making the statement LIED.
Until the DOJ starts sending those who LIE to prison .. why bother making such a big deal about taking an Oath not to Lie? The way it is now .... any and everybody feels really comfortable with Lies to Congress, the FBI, the DOJ and the Judicial Committee.
Yes that's true, especially if the witness had been drinking or has any various biases and motives..
As an aside that link you posted has a good explanation for why Asian Americans vote overwhelmingly democrat and aligns with what I suspected, and why Democrats play up the identity politics angle.
Can anyone clear up these questions about Ford's accusations?
1. Is it true or not that every witness she has named denied what happened?
2. She said she mentioned the incident to a therapist. But she hasn't turned in her therapy notes on the incident. Is this true or not?
3. Didn't she also say that Kavanaugh's name isn't in those therapy notes?
4. She said the incident happened in the mid 80's but then said it happened in 1982. Is this true or not?
1). True - none of her named witness agree with her statement
2). She refuses to turn over her therapy notes and can't remember whether she showed the notes to the Washington Post writer or just told her about what was in them -- sounds like she showed them to her, because the WashPo article says the notes are not the same as what Blasey Ford told her.
3). Correct - she never told her different therapists any names - she did you the names "Brett" and "Mark" (no last names and only once each) in her letter that was used in the polygraph test.
4). She has given several different dates and at least 3-4 different numbers of people at the party.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
A Few Christine Blasey Ford Questions
