Page 35 of 49 FirstFirst ... 2531323334353637383945 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 525 of 728

Thread: Kavanaugh is about to get the Merick Garland treatment!

  1. #511 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Gone to the mattresses
    Posts
    22,458
    Thanks
    1,135
    Thanked 11,622 Times in 8,086 Posts
    Groans
    874
    Groaned 639 Times in 618 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anatta View Post
    ccording to the Post, Ford has an imperfect memory of the events. “Ford said she does not remember how the gathering came together the night of the incident.… She also doesn’t recall who owned the house or how she got there.” She does seem to remember the county, and this will no doubt be helpful to the committee if she musters the courage to appear. She never mentioned the event to anyone until 2012, when she attended couples therapy. The therapist’s notes from those sessions conflict with her current story but she claims that is an error on the therapist’s part. Her basic story goes thus:

    She alleges that Kavanaugh — who played football and basketball at Georgetown Prep — held her down with the weight of his body and fumbled with her clothes, seemingly hindered by his intoxication. [Kavanaugh classmate Mark] Judge stood across the room, she said, and both boys were laughing “maniacally.” She said she yelled, hoping that someone downstairs would hear her over the music, and Kavanaugh clapped his hand over her mouth to silence her.

    She escaped by locking herself in the bathroom, from whence she emerged after a few minutes. She isn’t sure how she got home. That’s pretty much it. This event happened 36 years ago among adolescents. The victim and the villain were under the influence of alcohol and the former can’t remember half of the details — yet somehow recalls enough to ruin the latter’s career. The latter says it never happened. This is why we have the Sixth Amendment, folks. Anonymous accusers enjoy little credibility and less respect among honorable people. These are characteristics they share with Democrats and journalists
    Let's not forget that the "therapists" notes conflict with what she is saying today. The "therapists" notes say there were four boys in the room when she claims to have been assaulted. Today she says it is only two of them. That is a pretty big discrepancy. She claims the therapist got it wrong. But, who are you going to believe? The transcribed note at the time it was said or what the accuser says today? I think any court of law would put more weight into the written word

  2. #512 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    7,318
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,883 Times in 2,239 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 124 Times in 120 Posts

    Default

    Let us see if this left wing democrat prof has the (wink, wink) BALLS to testify "UNDER OATH" to congress....when...if proven to be lying through the preponderance of evidence (at least 50% of her statements are proven to be obvious and premeditated untruths)….carries a possible prison sentence of up to 5 years under US CODE 18 section 1001. Something as serious as a SCOTUS appointment indeed would set a great example for those involved in the 11hr "ME TOO" accusation.....for future legal precedent.

    Enjoy the show....and lets see how far the left is willing to go...UNDER OATH.




    POPCORN ANYONE? Everyone realizes that "Chairman" Grassley has the authority to demand these statements from both sides plus witnesses be heard behind closed doors, and can be as long or as brief as the chairmen sees fit when its obvious who is telling the truth and who is lying....no?

  3. #513 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    27,321
    Thanks
    30,862
    Thanked 16,758 Times in 11,557 Posts
    Groans
    1,063
    Groaned 889 Times in 847 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    Good news for America, bad news for Kavanaugh:

    "Washington (CNN)Debra Katz, the lawyer for a woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, said Monday that her client would be willing to testify in public to the Senate Judiciary Committee. "

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/17/polit...ugh/index.html
    Yeah but they're not too anxious for Ford to open her mouth, no one's invited her yet. LOL
    I can't wait for her to start yapping.
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Stretch For This Post:

    TOP (09-17-2018)

  5. #514 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    27,321
    Thanks
    30,862
    Thanked 16,758 Times in 11,557 Posts
    Groans
    1,063
    Groaned 889 Times in 847 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    Well that's certainly a new position Conservatives have.

    Suddenly, lie detectors aren't reliable? Then why do they want to have everyone at the WH submit to one to find out who wrote that Op-Ed?
    I guess you would know...
    Yes I DO know. I posted elsewhere about my own experience with lying on those things and getting away with it 46 years ago at a job I had which required them every 2 months.
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  6. #515 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Blue Ridge
    Posts
    37,741
    Thanks
    21,918
    Thanked 12,581 Times in 9,703 Posts
    Groans
    4,312
    Groaned 1,312 Times in 1,210 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    There's only one way to find out; subpoena them.

    I bet most of them never received any sort of communication from Grassley.

    I bet most of the women in his letter either didn't actually sign it, or simply don't exist.
    Meh. Waste of time. Say hello to Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh.

    Then be prepared to say goodbye to Race Baiter Ginsberg, the corpse currently on life support.

  7. #516 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    63,304
    Thanks
    6,234
    Thanked 13,410 Times in 10,039 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,947 Times in 2,728 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Soul View Post
    Meh. Waste of time. Say hello to Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh
    Ahhh, you want to move on because you don't want the process to be put under the microscope. Why? Well, because it's going to reveal bad faith actions by the GOP during this process...and it likely wouldn't be the first time they did this either.

    So Grassley invents 65 women who say Brett's a good guy, doesn't provide their signatures on a document he says they signed, then bristles when called on his bluff.

    The reason Grassley won't call these 65 women to testify on behalf of Brett is because they don't exist, right?
    When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist


  8. #517 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Blue Ridge
    Posts
    37,741
    Thanks
    21,918
    Thanked 12,581 Times in 9,703 Posts
    Groans
    4,312
    Groaned 1,312 Times in 1,210 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    Ahhh, you want to move on because you don't want the process to be put under the microscope. Why? Well, because it's going to reveal bad faith actions by the GOP during this process...and it likely wouldn't be the first time they did this either.

    So Grassley invents 65 women who say Brett's a good guy, doesn't provide their signatures on a document he says they signed, then bristles when called on his bluff.

    The reason Grassley won't call these 65 women to testify on behalf of Brett is because they don't exist, right?
    No, I want to move on because this inconsequential process should have been over already. Let's get on with the real fireworks.

  9. #518 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    7,318
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,883 Times in 2,239 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 124 Times in 120 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    Ahhh, you want to move on because you don't want the process to be put under the microscope. Why? Well, because it's going to reveal bad faith actions by the GOP during this process...and it likely wouldn't be the first time they did this either.

    So Grassley invents 65 women who say Brett's a good guy, doesn't provide their signatures on a document he says they signed, then bristles when called on his bluff.

    The reason Grassley won't call these 65 women to testify on behalf of Brett is because they don't exist, right?
    That's why US CODE TITLE 18 Section 1001 exists. Its time to put an end to He said, She Said.....its time to GO UNDER OATH and face a 5 year prison sentence for perjury. Let's see if the left really wants a formal hearing on the hill.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ralph For This Post:

    MAGA MAN (09-17-2018), TOP (09-17-2018)

  11. #519 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    63,304
    Thanks
    6,234
    Thanked 13,410 Times in 10,039 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,947 Times in 2,728 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Soul View Post
    No, I want to move on because this inconsequential process should have been over already. Let's get on with the real fireworks.
    But it's not because this isn't just about Brett anymore; this is about what the GOP stoops to in order to hide exculpatory information from the people who would vote on his confirmation.

    Grassley made up most of those 65 women, didn't he? He forged their names to a document to provide political cover for a nominee they knew had these accusations against him.

    So this isn't just about Brett; this is about how the GOP consistently and routinely acts in bad faith.

    You see that bad faith trickle down to Conservatives on message boards.
    When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist


  12. #520 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    63,304
    Thanks
    6,234
    Thanked 13,410 Times in 10,039 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,947 Times in 2,728 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph View Post
    That's why US CODE TITLE 18 Section 1001 exists. Its time to put an end to He said, She Said.....its time to GO UNDER OATH and face a 5 year prison sentence for perjury. Let's see if the left really wants a formal hearing on the hill.
    I'm all for it. And while we're at it, subpoena all 65 of those women who supposedly signed that "Brett-is-a-good-guy-no-really-believe-me-er,um-believe-these-women-I-just-made-up".
    When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist


  13. #521 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    56,511
    Thanks
    25,110
    Thanked 20,424 Times in 16,412 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 1,433 Times in 1,355 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    I'm all for it. And while we're at it, subpoena all 65 of those women who supposedly signed that "Brett-is-a-good-guy-no-really-believe-me-er,um-believe-these-women-I-just-made-up".
    Not necessary...just let her tell her tale....

  14. #522 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    63,304
    Thanks
    6,234
    Thanked 13,410 Times in 10,039 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,947 Times in 2,728 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TOP View Post
    Not necessary...just let her tell her tale....
    See, I disagree...

    I think we need to explore how the GOP shit all over this process; how they held back exculpatory information; how they concocted a defense pre-hoc of their nominee; how they're still holding back e-mails from his time in the Bush the Dumber White House...

    Bringing those "65 women" to testify will undoubtedly reveal the GOP fraud during this process.
    When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist


  15. #523 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    56,511
    Thanks
    25,110
    Thanked 20,424 Times in 16,412 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 1,433 Times in 1,355 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    See, I disagree...

    I think we need to explore how the GOP shit all over this process; how they held back exculpatory information; how they concocted a defense pre-hoc of their nominee; how they're still holding back e-mails from his time in the Bush the Dumber White House...

    Bringing those "65 women" to testify will undoubtedly reveal the GOP fraud during this process.
    What's fraudulent?

  16. #524 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 8,341 Times in 5,714 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 374 Times in 355 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LV426 View Post
    See, I disagree...

    I think we need to explore how the GOP shit all over this process; how they held back exculpatory information; how they concocted a defense pre-hoc of their nominee; how they're still holding back e-mails from his time in the Bush the Dumber White House...

    Bringing those "65 women" to testify will undoubtedly reveal the GOP fraud during this process.
    are you still in this thread nut-bag

    I thought we disqualified your opinion from here on out.
    wtf is wrong with you?

    "why don't we bring those 65 women in to testify"

    and then why don't we bring in 65 more to testify that these 65 women are not credible because they beat up a gay girl in grade school, and then another 65 to testify that the gay girl asked for it.

    If we lived in nut-bag world with you, just like with the Mueller investigation we can just keep supeonoing people until someone says something we like, then spend 14 news cycles talking about it, until you find something else.

    you are what is wrong with nut-bag world, you're the friggin flag bearer.

    Your opinion means nothing, don't you get it
    This just In::: Trump indicted for living in liberals heads and not paying RENT

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    Trump Is Coming back to a White House Near you

  17. #525 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    63,304
    Thanks
    6,234
    Thanked 13,410 Times in 10,039 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,947 Times in 2,728 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TOP View Post
    What's fraudulent?
    Withholding exculpatory information, forging a document...
    When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-10-2017, 06:39 AM
  2. Should President Obama appoint Merrick Garland?
    By Mott the Hoople in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 04-11-2016, 06:25 AM
  3. GOP senator reverses stance: No hearings for Garland
    By Konono in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-02-2016, 09:07 PM
  4. Garland clerk 'holding on to life' after being set on fire
    By RockX in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-26-2012, 07:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •