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.
So, time/date/where/how many she cannot remember, the Drs notes are wrong...so, what is the real issue?
Plus now she won’t testify unless the FBI does a full investigation. Convenient delay tactic since they already said they won’t investigate. The story sounds like a bunch of BS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
Says the party that literally stole a SC seat from the Democrats. We're just trying to keep up with the Republicans here.
I read commentators saying how unfair this is to Kavanaugh. No more unfair than what happened to Garland. From this point on you’re going to see this kind of dung in every nomination that one party doesn’t like. They’ll try to block it by any means necessary.
I prefer to know exactly what is going on and certainly have no issue about the FBI finding out exactly what is going on. Here is the ISSUE - what exactly can they investigate in view of the following???
Even the Washington Post wrote that Ford's letter and recall are different from the notes of the therapist.
I would bet money that the Therapist won't testify - she has to come up with something better than:
1). I don't know what year
2). I don't know what month
3). I don't know what date
4). I don't know how I got to the party
5). I don't know how I got home from the party
6). I don't know who was at the party -- except for that guy I don't want to be a Supreme Court Judge
7). I don't know where the party was
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1). I do know I immediately hired a high power Attorney - from D.C. not from my own city
2). I do know that it won't be allowed to ask me ANY questions about my background or Politics.
3). I do know these accusations are enough to destroy the reputation of a US Federal Judge
4). I do know these accusations are enough to stop a US Supreme Court Confirmation
5). I do know that everyone MUST believe ME - despite the above items, because I'm a Woman
6). I do know I was drinking and think I was 15.
Lord is refusing to tell her story under OATH after saying she welcomed that.
Her story continues to "change". Justice Kavanaugh won't have an "assault" hanging over him because the woman told a Fairy Tale to the press and she won't even show up in person.
So, time/date/where/how many she cannot remember, the Drs notes are wrong...so, what is the real issue?
This letter is by woman who was classmate of Dr. Ford's
Posted this on her Facebook
This might be one place for the FBI to start its investigation
With someone who claims she and others heard about this assault soon after it happened
And knew it was not the only one of its type in that social milieu... https://mobile.twitter.com/jaybookma...86834284789760
You would think he would embrace the opportunity to prove his innocence....and not just with a he said, she said defense.
Since when did we go from "innocent until PROVEN guilty"??
The Leftists think that any man is immediately guilty and must "prove his innocence" - in this particular case with no date/time/place/year/month ... anything beyond a news article and an accuser he doesn't know that has an allegation from 36 years ago.
Try that with your local police or any judge - just for fun, cut the time period from 36 years down to 1 year. This stuff is crazy and the Left has to know it's crazy. NORMAL PEOPLE know it's Crazy - there is no such thing as "prove your innocence" based on a News article, when the accuser won't even testify about it.
What the GOP did was legal and within the rules of the US Senate.
Really? Can you point out the rule that says within the last year of a president's term he is not allowed to nominate SC justices? I'd really love to read that. And remember that next time the roles are reversed. The GOP has set precedent now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth
What the Democrats are doing here is looking more and more like calculated sleazery.
The Democrats have a right to question, and yes, to try to slow down a nomination. That's definitely in the rules of the Senate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth
Most reasonable people will discern the difference.
Yes, they will. But you won't like the discernment.
This letter is by woman who was classmate of Dr. Ford's
Posted this on her Facebook
This might be one place for the FBI to start its investigation
With someone who claims she and others heard about this assault soon after it happened
And knew it was not the only one of its type in that social milieu... https://mobile.twitter.com/jaybookma...86834284789760
I would love the FBI to get involved, but of course the GOP will never allow that to happen. They want to get this over and done with. I cannot imagine her having to go before that group of old white farts and discuss what happened to her. Like they would have any clue. She's already going in with the deck stacked against her. If they wanted to really know the truth, they would subpoena Judge, but they don't really want to know. They want to let her testify, say okay, have him testify, say okay, rule in his favor, confirm him and move on. And that is exactly what will happen I predict. I'm limiting myself to just a couple minutes a day of this foolishness. Talk about a kangaroo court.
I would love the FBI to get involved, but of course the GOP will never allow that to happen. They want to get this over and done with. I cannot imagine her having to go before that group of old white farts and discuss what happened to her. Like they would have any clue. She's already going in with the deck stacked against her. If they wanted to really know the truth, they would subpoena Judge, but they don't really want to know. They want to let her testify, say okay, have him testify, say okay, rule in his favor, confirm him and move on. And that is exactly what will happen I predict. I'm limiting myself to just a couple minutes a day of this foolishness. Talk about a kangaroo court.
tell me what the FBI is supposed to do exactly with a 36 year old claim where the accuser can't remember when or where it happened or how many people were involved? Please explain
Really? Can you point out the rule that says within the last year of a president's term he is not allowed to nominate SC justices? I'd really love to read that. And remember that next time the roles are reversed. The GOP has set precedent now.
The Democrats have a right to question, and yes, to try to slow down a nomination. That's definitely in the rules of the Senate.
Yes, they will. But you won't like the discernment.
No rule that says you cannot. And since you are now gloating that the Democrats will do it as well, then it would seem that you approve of it.
The Democrats have a right- Nay!- they have the RESPONSIBILTIY to question. And the GOP agrees and has asked the alleged victim to be sworn and appear for .... wait for it ... here it comes .... QUESTIONING!
And she is refusing whilst changing her story by the day.
So what the hell are you talking about?
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.
