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.
Ford received a fitting treatment for what the socialist Democrat hit job committee set her up for. She had NO evidence and a completely unreliable memory. Emotions of an insecure, promiscuous teen. NO facts. And given the fact that it's been 35 years since the insecure and clearly unstable psychologist went to the party with no parents to supervise the privileged teens from the private schools, why would this be the focus of a government investigation? Liberals pinning all their hatred on one judge who has been investigated by the FBI six times previously--this socialist agenda must be very important for Democrats. George Soros pays big money to get his way through the liberals in the US.
Next up: Watch the liberals digging for the sordid affairs in your child's elementary school or pre-school. Liberal fascism in action.
Ford received a fitting treatment for what the socialist Democrat hit job committee set her up for. She had NO evidence and a completely unreliable memory. Emotions of an insecure, promiscuous teen. NO facts. And given the fact that it's been 35 years since the insecure and clearly unstable psychologist went to the party with no parents to supervise the privileged teens from the private schools, why would this be the focus of a government investigation? Liberals pinning all their hatred on one judge who has been investigated by the FBI six times previously--this socialist agenda must be very important for Democrats. George Soros pays big money to get his way through the liberals in the US.
Next up: Watch the liberals digging for the sordid affairs in your child's elementary school or pre-school. Liberal fascism in action.
#1 - she had lie detector test
#2 - there is/was evidence - Repubs prevented it from being presented
#3 - the previous investigations didn’t go back 35 years
#4 - lets suppose she was/is a wh*re* - does this mean it’s OK to assault her?!
#5 - how is she “clearly unstable!?” She has a PhD and a good job
She STILL deserved a REAL investigation, not the GOP coverup she got.
she had no evidence, and no witnesses, and she couldnt even remember ANY details. the other problem she had was that it was a repressed memory and they have been proven to be quite faulty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyNC
#1 - she had lie detector test
#2 - there is/was evidence - Repubs prevented it from being presented
#3 - the previous investigations didn’t go back 35 years
#4 - lets suppose she was/is a wh*re* - does this mean it’s OK to assault her?!
#5 - how is she “clearly unstable!?” She has a PhD and a good job
the lie detector test is not admissible in court, so it doesnt count.
what evidence did she have?
you have never been through an FBI background check have you? they go through your life witha fine toothed comb. and kavanaugh has been through seven of them.
no it doesnt make it alright to assault her, but her credibility is in question.
she lied about many things, for instance she said she was afraid to fly. but that didnt stop her from flying to hawaii, or many other places around the country over the years now did it? she made a lot of claims that were false, and she is under the care of a metal health professional.
she had no evidence, and no witnesses, and she couldnt even remember ANY details. the other problem she had was that it was a repressed memory and they have been proven to be quite faulty.
the lie detector test is not admissible in court, so it doesnt count.
what evidence did she have?
you have never been through an FBI background check have you? they go through your life witha fine toothed comb. and kavanaugh has been through seven of them.
no it doesnt make it alright to assault her, but her credibility is in question.
she lied about many things, for instance she said she was afraid to fly. but that didnt stop her from flying to hawaii, or many other places around the country over the years now did it? she made a lot of claims that were false, and she is under the care of a metal health professional.
Lie detector counts - it’s not proof positive. Kavanaugh didn’t take one.
No, I haven’t been thru a background check, but, I run them on all new ee’s, as do my clients on my ee’s. They don’t go back 35 years. One of my guys has the 2nd highest Clearance that there is. It took a full year to get it - had to literally not work for a year. He then worked in the Pentagon. This ain’t the kind of background check that Kavanaugh went thru. It’s a cursory, run your Soc.Sec. #, drivers license, last several addresses
Her evidence included Judge who was in the room - didn’t bother to interview him!
So, if she was a wh*re then she woulda wanted Kavanagh - is this what you mean!? LOL
Lie detector counts - it’s not proof positive. Kavanaugh didn’t take one.
no they dont. there is a reason they are not admissible in court, and that is because they are notoriously unreliable.
Quote:
No, I haven’t been thru a background check, but, I run them on all new ee’s, as do my clients on my ee’s. They don’t go back 35 years. One of my guys has the 2nd highest Clearance that there is. It took a full year to get it - had to literally not work for a year. He then worked in the Pentagon. This ain’t the kind of background check that Kavanaugh went thru. It’s a cursory, run your Soc.Sec. #, drivers license, last several addresses
but these are not FBI background checks now are they?
Quote:
Her evidence included Judge who was in the room - didn’t bother to interview him!
you mean the mr judge that came out and said that nothing of the sort happened after she made her claims? that judge? sorry but she had NO witnesses.
Quote:
So, if she was a wh*re then she woulda wanted Kavanagh - is this what you mean!? LOL
i never said that and you know it. stop putting words to what i wrote.
Is there even the slightest chance she/you could be wrong?
Is it possible a memory from over 35 years ago could be wrong?
Every witness she presented said they had no clue what she was talking about.
Has feminism regressed to the point that women, any woman, should be believed no matter what?
I have some serious issues with this totalitarian mentality. I have two sons and a daughter. I fear for their futures in this kind of world.
I'm an actually shocked at how many people think a simple accusation means the guy is guilty. I know, it's not a trial but a similar standard should apply across the board on all subjects. I feel bad for women throughout all time who were kicked aside and not believed, but two wrongs don't make a right, most certainly.
I/we don't truly know what happened, in all fairness, but the rush to condemn a man that has absolutely zero history of this stuff. I mean these guys that do this type of stuff, they do it on the reg. There's patterns of behavior generally that can be used to determine things. I mean we all have heard of guys who are creeps and usually they do stuff all of the time to women, might not raise to rape levels, but crude comments and things along those lines, most women know the office pervert and that sort of thing gets around. People talk, and this guy has had a long history and not a single story from co-workers and the like. Again, if this guy was doing this someone over the years, especially way back when he was in a less powerful position certainly some scuttlebutt as they say would have been evident as people talk. This guy has had 6 prior FBI interviews/investigations for the position and nothing has come up, no pattern, no history, nothing.
That scumbag lawyer tried to trot out a story with the ten rapes and that was pretty much nonsense. I think most people saw that stunt for what it was, a stunt. Nothing believable about that at all.
I would apply this same metric of treating people with basic decency toward a more liberal justice. Politics shouldn't be an issue and the whole process in general of how we select a SCOTUS justice needs a make over.
No, the background checks I mentioned aren’t FBI checks. It was stated multiple times that the 6 background checks that Kavanaugh went thru did not go back 35 years.
Please tell me why the FBI didn’t interview Kavanugh in their follow-up review. I can’t seem to come up with a reason!
Please tell me why the FBI didn’t interview Kavanugh in their follow-up review. I can’t seem to come up with a reason!
Yep. I'm pretty sure in an FBI interview after the 9/27 Inquisition Kavanaugh woulda broken down into spilled the beans, and finally confessed to molesting Ford and other women, maybe a few men as well.
Jazz, Obahm hasn’t replied -maybe you can help us w/this.
Please let me know your theory as to why the FBI didn’t interview Kavanaugh
TIA
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.
spilled the beans, and finally confessed to molesting Ford and other women, maybe a few men as well.
