I was listening to NPR today on t he ride home. They interrupted the normal BBC world series with this dude's testimony.
I find it hard to believe that a football player drinking beer didn't have any sexual contact with anyone until many years after highschool.
Dude lied under oath, and knows that because it's hard to disprove his statement. Of course, once you consider sword testimony as evidence, it's pretty obvious he's a lying douchebag.
Topic: Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh - page 11. (Read 13396 times)
In my opinion, this will set precedent for future nominations, he claimed character asasination against him as the accusations against him can not be proved, which is the case. The whole argument is based on hearsay of events of decades ago.
In my opinion it is totally unfair to the man. Because no matter what happens there is no way he will get out of this unscathed.
In my opinion it is totally unfair to the man. Because no matter what happens there is no way he will get out of this unscathed.
If Mike Judge produced a sworn affidavit stating they have no knowledge of the supposed events at all, it's hard to see what more would be had by requiring his attendance.
Wait, I forgot. Another delay,,,
Wait, I forgot. Another delay,,,
He could have arrived today like everyone else so no delay would have been needed. There are certainly questions that can be asked beyond his knowledge of the specific party. He's written books that seem to contradict what Kavanaugh has said.
The real problem is that he would likely be a bad witness for Kavanaugh so the Republicans don't want him there.
Realistically the minimum cost including attorneys (required) to go to something like that is probably 10k.
I suppose other-side could ask him about drunken nights in high school, stuff unrelated to the Ford issue.
Meanwhile, it's Kavanaugh's turn and he's fighting mad.
https://www.redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-fights-back-opening-statement/
If Mike Judge produced a sworn affidavit stating they have no knowledge of the supposed events at all, it's hard to see what more would be had by requiring his attendance.
Wait, I forgot. Another delay,,,
Wait, I forgot. Another delay,,,
He could have arrived today like everyone else so no delay would have been needed. There are certainly questions that can be asked beyond his knowledge of the specific party. He's written books that seem to contradict what Kavanaugh has said.
The real problem is that he would likely be a bad witness for Kavanaugh so the Republicans don't want him there.
...they are constantly questioning the fact that Mark Judge hasn't been subpeonaed...
If Mike Judge produced a sworn affidavit stating they have no knowledge of the supposed events at all, it's hard to see what more would be had by requiring his attendance.Wait, I forgot. Another delay,,,
We are moving away from rule of law and towards rule of power away from freedom and towards tyranny.
There is not a single man in the country who could not be potentially brought down by the playbook unleashed during this nomination.
It's not surprising really. These tactics have a long history and they work.
Show me the man and I'll show you the crime
https://m.oxfordeagle.com/2018/05/09/show-me-the-man-and-ill-show-you-the-crime/
There is not a single man in the country who could not be potentially brought down by the playbook unleashed during this nomination.
It's not surprising really. These tactics have a long history and they work.
Show me the man and I'll show you the crime
https://m.oxfordeagle.com/2018/05/09/show-me-the-man-and-ill-show-you-the-crime/
Quote from: Michael Henry
Lavrentiy Beria, the most ruthless and longest-serving secret police chief in Joseph Stalin’s reign of terror in Russia and Eastern Europe, bragged that he could prove criminal conduct on anyone, even the innocent.
“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” was Beria’s infamous boast. He served as deputy premier from 1941 until Stalin’s death in 1953, supervising the expansion of the gulags and other secret detention facilities for political prisoners. He became part of a post-Stalin, short-lived ruling troika until he was executed for treason after Nikita Khrushchev’s coup d’etat in 1953.
Beria targeted “the man” first, then proceeded to find or fabricate a crime. Beria’s modus operandi was to presume the man guilty, and fill in the blanks later. By contrast, under the United States Constitution, there’s a presumption of innocence that emanates from the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments, as set forth in Coffin vs. U.S. (1895).
“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” was Beria’s infamous boast. He served as deputy premier from 1941 until Stalin’s death in 1953, supervising the expansion of the gulags and other secret detention facilities for political prisoners. He became part of a post-Stalin, short-lived ruling troika until he was executed for treason after Nikita Khrushchev’s coup d’etat in 1953.
Beria targeted “the man” first, then proceeded to find or fabricate a crime. Beria’s modus operandi was to presume the man guilty, and fill in the blanks later. By contrast, under the United States Constitution, there’s a presumption of innocence that emanates from the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments, as set forth in Coffin vs. U.S. (1895).
.... if there is no conclusive proof against Kavanaugh; I don't see any reason why he shud be withheld on his nomination.
Because turning the court 6-3 strict constitutionalist vs progressive would be a serious long term loss for the implementation of the New World Order in the USA.Liberals can't get the world they want through the elections, so they try to get puppet judges that do their bidding.
Kim Strassel made a very good point about all the requests for an FBI investigation:
The FBI doesn't even have the ability to compel anyone to talk to them, while the Senate does.
Quote from: Kim Strallel, WSJ editorial board via Twitter
This can't be said enough. And so saying it again. The Senate is doing as thorough if not more thorough an investigation than the FBI would/could. It is talking to same people, getting same evidence. Anybody calling for FBI investigation is doing so purely for delay.
The FBI doesn't even have the ability to compel anyone to talk to them, while the Senate does.
I'm watching the hearing; what is shocking me is the fact that all Dems so far have tried to humanise her and have asked questions that cud easily apply to Kavanaugh too; like how did your spouse feel or how did your children feel.
The common line is that all Dems believe her; I am not saying that she is a liar; but why wud someone believe anyone on face value; the Dems are saying that this is not a trial; yet they are constantly questioning the fact that Mark Judge hasn't been subpeonaed; then how come is it not a trial?
Oh; this is a trial for Kavanaugh but not for the accuser?
I am totally not on the same page as a conservative individual as the judge, but if there is no conclusive proof against Kavanaugh; I don't see any reason why he shud be withheld on his nomination.
The common line is that all Dems believe her; I am not saying that she is a liar; but why wud someone believe anyone on face value; the Dems are saying that this is not a trial; yet they are constantly questioning the fact that Mark Judge hasn't been subpeonaed; then how come is it not a trial?
Oh; this is a trial for Kavanaugh but not for the accuser?
I am totally not on the same page as a conservative individual as the judge, but if there is no conclusive proof against Kavanaugh; I don't see any reason why he shud be withheld on his nomination.
Actually it's both things being discussed.
The hearing is already well underway. Whatever the procedural squabble was with its scheduling - it's over. I mean we can discuss it but that's quite pointless.
Her legal team was lying about the reasons why she cannot testify on Monday, and why she could not submit to interviews with Senate investigators.
Unless you can somehow prove that she's not afraid of flying it's a bit bold to call it a "lie".
You're pissed about a date change from Monday to Thursday but you don't think that an allegation of attempted rape warrants an additional background investigation. Come on, there is a serious subject being discussed, not some procedural squabble.
Actually it's both things being discussed.
The attorneys are paid liars, of course. Paid by persons who want to work those procedural squabbles.
And now you've got all four of the people that Ford claims were at the party refuting her, plus two other men saying they think they may be the ones that she recalls groping her.
But yeah, it's nice that she actually showed up.
Her legal team was lying about the reasons why she cannot testify on Monday, and why she could not submit to interviews with Senate investigators.
Unless you can somehow prove that she's not afraid of flying it's a bit bold to call it a "lie".
You're pissed about a date change from Monday to Thursday but you don't think that an allegation of attempted rape warrants an additional background investigation. Come on, there is a serious subject being discussed, not some procedural squabble.
The women from CA just testified that she traveled to DC via airplane, that she traveled to DE via airplane last summer, and that has traveled via airplane many times, often to get to vacations, and for business purposes.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
Being afraid of something is not the same as being completely unable to do it. She got to DC, she's testifying under oath (something you didn't expect her to do).
edit: The women also testified that she did not pay for the polygraph test, but does not know who paid for it.
The women from CA just testified that she traveled to DC via airplane, that she traveled to DE via airplane last summer, and that has traveled via airplane many times, often to get to vacations, and for business purposes.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
Being afraid of something is not the same as being completely unable to do it. She got to DC, she's testifying under oath (something you didn't expect her to do).
The women from CA just testified that she traveled to DC via airplane, that she traveled to DE via airplane last summer, and that has traveled via airplane many times, often to get to vacations, and for business purposes.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
This directly contradicts with her claimed fear of flying, and with her reasons to not be able to testify on Monday, as she claimed to be afraid of flying.
She also testified that she did not submit to interviews with Senate staffers because she did not want to fly, and that she was hoping the staffers would come to her location, however this directly conflicts with Senator Grassley's staffers offering to go to her location to interview her.
....
Some times folks have trouble admitting when they're wrong! ...
Some times folks have trouble admitting when they're wrong! ...
Geez, he looks pretty stubborn...
I did not assault her on a boat.
I did not assault her with a goat.
I did not assault her here or there.
I did not assault her anywhere.
#Kavanaughhttps://www.cnn.com/2018/09/26/politics/brett-kavanaugh-allegations/index.html …
(but did I think she was a goat? ...)
....
How about a link in addition to your opinion:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-kavanaugh-accuser-says-he-was-present-when-she-was-gang-raped
How about a link that doesn't try to download malware through a fake "flash update?"How about a link in addition to your opinion:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-kavanaugh-accuser-says-he-was-present-when-she-was-gang-raped
I realize it's the site and not you, just saying ....
Sorry, it's a shitty site but it's never done anything of the sort to me. Try this: https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=651797758
This is rather amusing. Facebook is censoring pro-Kavanaugh views.
https://www.halseynews.com/2018/09/26/amy-dryden-found-herself-banned-from-facebook-after-sharing-truth-about-cnn/
Facebook is currently doing everything in their power to protect CNN after they censored evidence that one of their producers, Scott Bronstein has been randomly calling people who used to attend school with Judge Brett Kavanaugh in an attempt to dig up dirt on the Supreme Court nominee that might be used to prevent his confirmation to the Supreme Court from taking place. Mark Zuckerberg’s social media platform took things a step further when they not only censored the evidence, but they deleted all media articles related to the evidence that was presented by Amy Dryden and banned Amy Dryden herself from the social media platform.
When Trump pulls the nomination (or Kavanaugh withdraws) the republicans and trump himself might just start to poll better something they need right now!
"I barely knew that Bart dude, he was just loitering around the White House for a couple of months and appeared on Fox News only once - how was I supposed to know he's a creep? Never touched me inappropriately."
Seriously though, McConnell is insisting they'll vote in the committee immediately regardless of hearing results. That's either very confident or very stupid.
Some times folks have trouble admitting when they're wrong! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErFKxSjpXdI
He's also "pot committed" on this nom and it looks like he's got one last shot to bully the holdouts! Not a bad bluff either since it doesn't matter if/when he "folds" on Kavanaugh before the vote, no need to do it to early just in case!
When Trump pulls the nomination (or Kavanaugh withdraws) the republicans and trump himself might just start to poll better something they need right now!
"I barely knew that Bart dude, he was just loitering around the White House for a couple of months and appeared on Fox News only once - how was I supposed to know he's a creep? Never touched me inappropriately."
Seriously though, McConnell is insisting they'll vote in the committee immediately regardless of hearing results. That's either very confident or very stupid.
And now Trump has set the stage for being able to flip on Kavanaugh and stab him in the back!
Trump said he could be persuaded to change his mind if Dr. Ford was credible (paraphrasing)... He doesn't have the votes lmfao and he is not getting them! Trump will be the first one to dump him if McConnell isn't really sure they have the votes after the hearing tomorrow!
There's way too much evidence now, the republicans lost this nom and Trump will cut Kavanaugh loose the second he see's it as in his best personal political interest he's already hedged his bet!
When Trump pulls the nomination (or Kavanaugh withdraws) the republicans and trump himself might just start to poll better something they need right now!
Trump said he could be persuaded to change his mind if Dr. Ford was credible (paraphrasing)... He doesn't have the votes lmfao and he is not getting them! Trump will be the first one to dump him if McConnell isn't really sure they have the votes after the hearing tomorrow!
There's way too much evidence now, the republicans lost this nom and Trump will cut Kavanaugh loose the second he see's it as in his best personal political interest he's already hedged his bet!
When Trump pulls the nomination (or Kavanaugh withdraws) the republicans and trump himself might just start to poll better something they need right now!
Jump to: