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 Ford texts the Washington Post about this alleged incident with Kavanaugh on or about july 7-9. Ford states there were 2 boys present and includes the info that she has the marriage therapy notes. The therapy notes state 4 boys were present.
Ford amends the copy of the therapy notes to "2 boys were preseent'' and testifies the therapist made an error in the notes.
2 boys present is Kavanaugh and Judge; 4 boys present would mean 2 additional boys that would need to be tracked to verify. Too many ''boys'' would have been a problem.
Ford needed to keep her story straight.
This and, among other things, the politics played by Feinstein & Katz since early August using an attempted rape story about a sitting Federal judge and a nominee to the SCOTUS, completely poisons this whole thing.
Not easy to keep your story straight when you are lying. Ms. Ford is one sick puppy. Proper questioning by a strong competent attorney would have blown her alleged case out of the water and we could have moved on by now.
She testified that she had one beer but then later I'm pretty sure she referred at least a couple of times to the "beers" that she had.
The craziest thing about this is how many people actually judge a book by its cover.
We have a blonde woman that despite her success in academia and multiple degrees comes across as a child choking back the tears and she is to be believed and is by hundreds of thousands of people.
On the other side we have a white guy that leans to the Right in his politics and likes to drink beer and he is a dirty scumbag of a Rapist that is GUILTY!
They have no doubt about this. What is really scary is that this witch hunt opens up the floor for any woman to accuse and destroy any man at any time.
The one thing that was missing from the Senate inquiry last week was the doll that the prosecutor would pull out and say "ok little Christine can you show the Senators where the evil rapist touched you"...
She would have had details at least of a place and time. Who drove her there and back. The people that were there, would corroborate who was there. The people outside would have had their interest saying they didn't know anything that happened, but Kavanaugh was there. In other words, given that anybody mentioned has no inclination that Kavanaugh and her were every remotely close, including anybody she was remotely close with (remember, she initially said she was there with a girl friend), her accounts are being fuzzed up by multiple different situations or occasions.
At least a time and place would have been corroborated or better remembered.
I don't know where you get this. I was sexually assaulted. I remember many details quite vividly. I don't remember the date. I remember him. I remember his name. I remember him threatening me if I told what he had done. I remember lots of details. But if someone were to question me, I'm sure there are many details I don't remember.
She wouldn't have been able to prove anything the night it happened. It would have his word against hers 40 years ago. What proof do you think she might have mustered back then?
She might have had bruises or scratches.
She could have told them where she was that night, how she got there and how she got home.
Police could have ascertained whether Kavanaugh was even at the location and how much he had drunk.
I don't know where you get this. I was sexually assaulted. I remember many details quite vividly. I don't remember the date. I remember him. I remember his name. I remember him threatening me if I told what he had done. I remember lots of details. But if someone were to question me, I'm sure there are many details I don't remember.
I also was sexually assaulted at age 12.
I remember where it was, I remember the clothing I wore and what he had on too, how he smelled, the noises he made and what I did immediately after.
The point is that witness testimony combined with police investigation is what solves (or doesn't solve) crimes like this.
HC is right ... crying while telling a vague story doesn't make someone a better witness, just as being angry after being accused doesn't rule someone ineligible for a job.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,626 posts, read 12,553,459 times
Reputation: 10485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
So one of Kavanaugh's friends says he will tell the FBI that Kavanaugh was a vicious drunk at Yale (grown up now). If this proves to be true, then Kavanaugh committed perjury before the Senate. Worse, once a violent drunk always a violent drunk.
Yep, a 'violent drunk will always be a violent drunk'.
He graduated Yale 28 years ago and quickly became employed in jobs that placed him in front of the public. He has been married for 14 years. That is a lot of years. In the almost 3 decades of being in the public eye has there ever been chatter about him being drunk and/or violent? Is there news articles, 911 calls, pictures of his wife with black eyes, etc? No? Hmm, wait, a violent drunk will always be violent, surely there is proof of that in the past 28 years, right? Surely all of those times that he'd been vetted, and whatnot, for different positions, those things would have come out, right?
Oh come on, 28 years is a very long time .. there would have to be something, right? And yet, there is NOTHING.
Sorry, your agenda has major flaws.
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.