Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, November 05, 2018

The Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee concluded there "was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims" of sexual misconduct leveled against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a report released over the weekend.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

For those of you whose first impulse is to slaughter the source, here is the bio of the writer of the embedded piece:

Margot Cleveland is a lawyer and a member of the Illinois State Bar, the Northern District of Illinois Bar, and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, as well as a CPA, licensed in Illinois. She is a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Price -- the law school's highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time faculty member and current adjunct professor for the college of business at the University of Notre Dame, where she received several teaching awards. She also taught as an adjunct professor at the Ave Maria School of Law. In addition to teaching, Cleveland is a freelance writer, covering business and legal issues as a Senior Contributor for The Federalist and as a Contributor to National Review Online and the Washington Examiner. She has also been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today.

#1 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 02:02 PM | Reply

remember when Chuck Grassley had a cow over OBAMA buying a beer at the Iowa state fare

yup, that old codger still has "some" of his marbles

#2 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-05 02:06 PM | Reply

"For those of you whose first impulse is to slaughter the source"

Chuck Grassley is the erectile disfunction candidate

#3 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-05 02:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Chuck Grassley is of the "Oldest-Old" generation, i.e. 85+

And nobody with a lick of sense wants an 85-year-old running anything

#4 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-05 02:18 PM | Reply

Nothing to see here, the FBI didn't investigate, she passed a lie detector test, Grassley is old, the fix was in...

-The Left

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 02:44 PM | Reply

"Grassley is old"

I wouldn't get in a car Grassley was driving

#6 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-05 02:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#5

Perfect retort.

End thread.

Jeff's lost his fffking mind if he thinks anyone will ever see Kavanaugh as anything more than a POS rapist.

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-05 02:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 5

Jeff's lost his fffking mind if he thinks anyone will ever see Kavanaugh as anything more than a POS rapist.

#7 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

We know that is how you will see him, regardless of any and all evidence to the contrary.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 02:49 PM | Reply

Chuck "Get off my lawn or I'll refer you to the FBI!" Grassley said what?

#9 | Posted by YAV at 2018-11-05 02:55 PM | Reply

"We know that is how you will see him, regardless of any and all evidence to the contrary.
#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

Evidence to the contrary?

There is none.

There is literally nothing more than your presumption of innocence, JeffJ.

Why can't you figure these things out without me holding your hand???

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 02:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

#7

It was a joke Clowny, but you knew that.

Why don't you take a look at the 414 page report, comprising of 45 individual interviews by licensed investigators and 25 sworn written statements relating to the various allegations made in the course of the investigation by Dr. Ford and others during the confirmation process and let us know if they missed anything.

We'll wait.

#11 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 03:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#10 Evidence like two accusers being caught lying? This hit job on Kavanaugh wouldn't even survive a requirement for preponderance of evidence.

#12 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2018-11-05 03:14 PM | Reply

"#10 Evidence like two accusers being caught lying?"

Kavanaugh himself lied about what's in his yearbook.

His credibility is no better than his accusers.

Well, except that one of his accusers passed a polygraph, and Kavanaugh did not even offer to take a polygraph. Advantage: accuser.

#13 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 03:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

You're a disgusting human being Jeff. Dr Ford passed a polygraph dear. Kavanaugh refused to take one. Dr Ford told the truth and you can't stand it.

#14 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-05 04:40 PM | Reply

Oh and of course you would link to the federalist. A Right wing screed.

#15 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-05 04:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

You're a disgusting human being Jeff. Dr Ford passed a polygraph dear. Kavanaugh refused to take one. Dr Ford told the truth and you can't stand it.

#14 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR AT 2018-11-05 04:40 PM

Turns out that that polygraph test was not only two questions, but neither of them asked her about the attack, only if she believed a written statement was true that she was handed was true (and that Dr. Ford refused to give them the full test or the statement that she was handed):

According to the Judiciary Committee report, Ford and her attorney, Debra Katz, gave the polygraph examiner a written statement they had prepared. After an interview, the examiner then asked Ford two questions: "Is any part of your statement false?" and "Did you make up any part of your statement?"

"Dr. Ford answered no to both questions. The examiner concluded that the test results did not indicate deception," the report said.

The committee report said it requested the full polygraph test along with audio or video recordings of the exam, but Ford "refused" to give them to the committee along with the notes from a therapy session about a past sexual assault that she shared with reporters.

USA Today: Takeaways from report on Kavanaugh allegations

#16 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 04:59 PM | Reply

#16 Shhhhh......can't interrupt Laura's narrative.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 05:11 PM | Reply

Oh and of course you would link to the federalist. A Right wing screed.

#15 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

i included the writer's bio in post #1 because I knew someone, most likely you, would try and slaughter the source.

#18 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 05:12 PM | Reply

"Turns out that that polygraph test was not only two questions, but neither of them asked her about the attack, only if she believed a written statement was true that she was handed was true"

To sum up: That's two more polygraphed answers than Kavanaugh provided.

Noted.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 05:24 PM | Reply

Ford was a tool who was F***** by liberal scumbags. She should claim #metoo status and sue the liberal garbage like Soros and Clinton.

#20 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2018-11-05 08:12 PM | Reply

Whether or not there was sexual misconduct was beside the point. This guy was up for a job interview to be a JUDGE ON THE SUPREME COURT. In normal circumstances, his conduct and lying during the hearings proved him unqualified to be a JUDGE ON THE SUPREME COURT.

#21 | Posted by hamburglar at 2018-11-05 08:13 PM | Reply

Re #20 Boegy1355

Provide evidence, oh sage one.

#22 | Posted by hamburglar at 2018-11-05 08:14 PM | Reply

Good headline edit, Rcade.

Much better than my headline.

#23 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 08:23 PM | Reply

his conduct and lying during the hearings proved him unqualified to be a JUDGE ON THE SUPREME COURT.

#21 | Posted by hamburglar

And exactly what did he lie about? There was never anything other than partisans making up stories at the 23rd hour at the behest of actual criminals?

#24 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2018-11-05 09:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"And exactly what did he lie about?"

His yearbook.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 09:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Provide evidence, oh sage one.

#22 | Posted by hamburglar

I thought it was well established during the hearing that evidence was not needed. But WAIT! There's more. Ford, along with many of the accusers are now going to have to have to answer for their false statements. And now there are witnesses. And Senator Sister Dianne Feinstein ain't taken thier calls. Oh! And now there's a tape of Harris' staff. Oh! And while Fords swore it was K, somebody else already said he was the one fooling around with her. You know it's gotta be true because some partisan said so.

#26 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2018-11-05 09:43 PM | Reply

Re: #24 Bogey1355

Kavanaugh's Lies [some are pedantic, but still, to be a JUDGE ON THE SUPREME COURT]: www.huffingtonpost.com

What I meant by "evidence": Please provide a source for your claims concerning Soros and Clinton. Where are you getting such 'news'?

#27 | Posted by hamburglar at 2018-11-05 10:47 PM | Reply

We know that is how you will see him, regardless of any and all evidence to the contrary.

#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

There is no evidence "to the contrary".

But I have one question, maybe RoC can chime in too. What do rapist balls taste like? Or is it his ass you're constantly licking?

#28 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 10:53 PM | Reply

There is no evidence "to the contrary".

#28 | POSTED BY JPW

Sure there is. There is a hell of a lot more evidence to the contrary than evidence to the affirmation.

#29 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 10:57 PM | Reply

Sure there is. There is a hell of a lot more evidence to the contrary than evidence to the affirmation.

#29 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

You can't have evidence of a negative.

#30 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:01 PM | Reply

"There is a hell of a lot more evidence to the contrary."

No there isn't.
It's his word against hers.
Always has been.

Just one other thing: She's got a poly; he ain't got one.

And if you want to get to witness credibility, he's weaker there too.

You should know. You're well accustomed to believing these kinds of accusations and you don't even have a poly to support it.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 11:07 PM | Reply

"You can't have evidence of a negative."

Well, you can have something like an iron-clad alibi. (Not that Kavanaugh does...)

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 11:13 PM | Reply

JPW,

Her story has several (to be charitable) inconsistencies. The most damning is that in the most recent iteration of her story, ALL of her named witnesses - including a lifelong friend - claim no knowledge of the incident. Her lifelong friend even stipulates she has no recollection of ever being at a party/gathering with our without Dr. Ford.

In sworn testimony she asserted she never coached anybody on how to take a polygraph. Her ex-boyfriend provides specifics refuting that.

In sworn testimony she cited trauma over this incident as the reason for adding a second door to her house - in reality, it was to create a completely separate area that could be rented out - the second door provided no additional egress for her for the parts of the house she inhabits.

Her lawyers cited her fear of flying due to PTSD over this incident - confined spaces - when in reality she flies regularly.

Her communications to WaPo cite the mid '80's when she was in her late teens as to when this happened - she testified to the SJC that it happened in '82 when she was 15.

Her recollection to her therapist had at least 1 key fact wrong when compared with her public testimony.

She cited her inability to form relationships after this which is contrary to what, at least certain, people who knew her at the time had observed.

Add to that we have exactly ZERO other allegations of sexual misconduct over his entire life that are even remotely close to being in the same ballpark as this. Maybe it was an isolated incident, but damn, you are talking about accepting an awful lot based solely on the fact that he was appointed by a Republican.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:24 PM | Reply

Correction:

Her lifelong friend even stipulates she has no recollection of ever being at a party/gathering with Kavanaugh with our without Dr. Ford.

#34 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:25 PM | Reply

"Her story has several (to be charitable) inconsistencies."

So does his testimony.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 11:28 PM | Reply

Yeah yeah, jeff. You've dragged that woobie out before to make yourself feel better.

Inconsistencies in memories isn't an uncommon thing.

The second door was speculative from a hit piece you've posted before (funny how righties are so gullible and parrot speculation like fact after a day or so of being spoon fed it).

you are talking about accepting an awful lot based solely on the fact that he was appointed by a Republican.

A partisan sees partisanship everywhere they look.

I wanted a legit investigation. That wasn't ever going to happen nor did it happen but Mr. Jeff "Constutionalist" J ran right along with them because gosh darnit, sitting on that fence post is tough work.

#36 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:30 PM | Reply

So does his testimony.

#35 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

He also lied on multiple occasions.

But I'm beginning to think that for Republicans lying is their version of cat game.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:31 PM | Reply

What do rapist balls taste like? Or is it his ass you're constantly licking?

I have no idea...are you asking for a "friend"?

#38 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:32 PM | Reply

I wanted a legit investigation.

I will repeat what I said to Clowny:

Why don't you take a look at the 414 page report, comprising of 45 individual interviews by licensed investigators and 25 sworn written statements relating to the various allegations made in the course of the investigation by Dr. Ford and others during the confirmation process and let us know if they missed anything.

We'll wait.

#39 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:33 PM | Reply

"...let us know if they missed anything."

Interviewing the named witness?

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-05 11:35 PM | Reply

Nice play, rightocorky.

Avoid having to say anything at all by demanding somebody take hours and hours to read something just so they can comment to you when you probably haven't read it either.

WEAK.

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:35 PM | Reply

How about this one, from the USA Today article:

"According to the Judiciary Committee report, Ford and her attorney, Debra Katz, gave the polygraph examiner a written statement they had prepared. After an interview, the examiner then asked Ford two questions: "Is any part of your statement false?" and "Did you make up any part of your statement?"

"Dr. Ford answered no to both questions. The examiner concluded that the test results did not indicate deception," the report said.

The committee report said it requested the full polygraph test along with audio or video recordings of the exam, but Ford "refused" to give them to the committee along with the notes from a therapy session about a past sexual assault that she shared with reporters."

Why would she and her lawyer refuse to give the full polygraph test and statement she examined to the JC investigators?

#42 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:36 PM | Reply

Besides, the report is probably a whitewashed version of the actual investigation to remove any damning parts.

There was no way Keganaugh was coming out of this anything less than pure as the newly driven snow.

And you're a fool if you thought otherwise.

#43 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:36 PM | Reply

#41

You were the one demanding a legit investigation, -------.

You have one...read it.

Or are you afraid it destroys your narrative?

#44 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If Dr. Ford had nothing to hide or gain, why refuse to release the sacred polygraph?

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:38 PM | Reply

"Why don't you take a look at the 414 page report, comprising of 45 individual interviews by licensed investigators and 25 sworn written statements"

And I proceeded to tell him the story of the twenty-seven 8 x 10 color glossy pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one...

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-05 11:38 PM | Reply

Inconsistencies in memories isn't an uncommon thing.

Agreed - which is all the more amazing that you are taking as absolute gospel a recollection that is 36 years old with ZERO corroborating evidence/witnesses/etc.

The second door was speculative from a hit piece you've posted before

Plenty of evidence to back it up.

I wanted a legit investigation.

An investigation is clearly on-going. Funny how all of a sudden you are pooh-poohing what is coming out.

#47 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

First it was only 3 witnesses...then 5...then 11. Not good enough according to JPW.

Now it is 45 witness interviews, and 25 sworn statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee...according to JPW, not good enough.

"Besides, the report is probably a whitewashed version of the actual investigation to remove any damning parts."

If Dr. Ford herself admits that she may have been incorrect...not good enough according to JPW.

#48 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:41 PM | Reply

A partisan sees partisanship everywhere they look.

the only thing that JPartisanW got right all night.

#50 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:42 PM | Reply

JPW,

At this point you are lashing out. Do you have any substantive refutation of the findings that are being discussed from the report?

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:42 PM | Reply

#51

Of course he doesn't, he just refuses to believe anything other than what he has been told to believe.

The deconstruction of JPW has been sad to watch over the past 18 months.

#52 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

RoC, JPW, Anybody -

I know this report is preliminary and was released on a Friday - slow news day.

Has this been covered in the MSM? Have Democrats commented on this? I haven't seen much in the way of any kind of validation or repudiation of this report.

#53 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:45 PM | Reply

Or are you afraid it destroys your narrative?

#44 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

------- LOL got under your skin a bit, did I rightocorky? C'mon, throw another couple hours of reading up across three or four links then crow to your victory!

#54 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:46 PM | Reply

Interviewing the named witness?

#40 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2018-11-05 11:35 PM

Read the report Dannie, I am willing to bet that they are included in the 45 interviews the JC investigators did. If they weren't, the libs would be screaming bloody murder about it over the past few days. Guess what...

*crickets*

#55 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:47 PM | Reply

The deconstruction of JPW has been sad to watch over the past 18 months.

#52 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Yes - but he almost always pulls himself back to a rational level after a while. Just be patient, stay rational and fact and logic focused and he'll come back around to discussing this, or most other issues, rationally.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:48 PM | Reply

LOL got under your skin a bit, did I rightocorky?M/i>

Nope, but Dorkus is gonna have words with you for taking his name in vain.

#57 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:48 PM | Reply

Html fail, but you get my point.

#58 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-05 11:49 PM | Reply

"Another Kavanaugh accuser admits to fabricating rape story"

BS headline.

The accusation itself has not been recanted; the woman claiming authorship of the letter about the story has. WORLD of difference.

#59 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-05 11:50 PM | Reply

Plenty of evidence to back it up.

You keep using that word but I don't think you know what it means.

An investigation is clearly on-going. Funny how all of a sudden you are pooh-poohing what is coming out.

#47 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I trust nothing with the GOP's finger prints on it. Their long strings of failures to discredit the Mueller investigation (remember secret societies, the ominous missing texts ect ect ect), Nunes' "memo" and the Everest sized heap of other -------- they've expected the public to swallow these past two years. (well...some of us did swallow apparently *cough*jeffjrightocorkysheepleskinulli*cough*)

Do you have any substantive refutation of the findings that are being discussed from the report?

#51 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

LOL when all else fails, ask a loaded question.

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:51 PM | Reply

JPW -

None of us are probably going to go through the effort of reading a 414 page report.

This is something we typically trust our media to do and report their findings based upon their trained eyes.

Based upon what I linked, most of what is being summarized is a recitation of what is already known and pretty much accepted, including the inconsistencies in Dr. Ford's story - you'll notice that nobody is even remotely discussing the Ramirez allegation any more, much less Swetnick and a couple of other absurd allegations.

A few new testimonies have been introduced that further weaken Dr Ford's testimony and this is a newsworthy development worth exploration if we are genuinely interested in trying to discover the truth, to the extent that it's even possible 36 years after the fact.

#61 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:54 PM | Reply

It's not exactly newsworthy that Chuck Grassley doesn't think there was any evidence of sexual assault by Kavanaugh. We may as well post Schumer's conclusions as fact while we're at it.

#62 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-05 11:54 PM | Reply

The accusation itself has not been recanted; the woman claiming authorship of the letter about the story has. WORLD of difference.

#59 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Then, surely she will produce to investigators the true identity of the woman who authored the letter.

#63 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:56 PM | Reply

Just be patient, stay rational and fact and logic focused

LOL this is why you think I'm so out there and the one devolving.

You actually think you're acting rationally based on facts and logic.

Nobody who continually listens to or gives the GOP the light of day after their absolute lack of good faith, honesty, integrity or decency the past ten years can claim rationality, facts or logic.

Or maybe I'm wrong and it's normal outside of my bubble to continually go back to a habitual liar, cheater and thief in one's life. I know I wouldn't. Ever.

#64 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:56 PM | Reply

If this was a bipartisan report, it would have credence. Without it, not so much.

#65 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-05 11:57 PM | Reply

I trust nothing with the GOP's finger prints on it.

#60 | POSTED BY JPW

But you swallow everything that has the Dem's fingerprints on it hook, line and sinker. At least you are honest.

#66 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-05 11:57 PM | Reply

This is something we typically trust our media to do and report their findings based upon their trained eyes.

I'm not questioning the retelling of it.

The Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee concluded there "was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims" of sexual misconduct leveled against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a report released over the weekend.

I don't trust that ---- heap to release of objective report nor even conduct an objective, good faith investigation.

#67 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:58 PM | Reply

But you swallow everything that has the Dem's fingerprints on it hook, line and sinker. At least you are honest.

#66 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Nonsense.

#68 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-05 11:59 PM | Reply

I don't trust that ---- heap to release of objective report nor even conduct an objective, good faith investigation.

#67 | POSTED BY JPW

I don't either, to be honest. Which is why I asked if Democrats and/or the MSM (1 in the same, if we are being honest) have cried foul over this report.

Democrats screamed bloody murder over the Nunez memo, which was absolutely befuddling on just about every count. It didn't reveal any national security secrets which was what Democrats were screaming about and it wasn't the Obama bombshell that the Republicans were promising.

#69 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:06 AM | Reply

Do you honestly find the GOP to be trustworthy? No reason to guess their intentions? They haven't earned derision and the disrespect many throw their way?

You honestly think they govern in good faith with the best for all behind their thinking and policy?

Explain to me, please, why you place a single ounce of trust or respect in the GOP.

Feel free to chim in RoC, because honestly righties look more like beaten wives than rational, thoughtful individuals from my perspective.

#70 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 12:08 AM | Reply

My point being - so far Democrats/MSM have been awfully quiet about this report, at least that I've seen. Granted, the midterms are upon us which, to be fair, would suck some of the wind out of the sails (like the nautical reference? I might ghost-write Obama's next book!) on any story of this nature right now.

#71 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You don't trust the memo but you want Democrats and the media to start crying about it? You're about as coherent as Trump at this point.

#72 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 12:10 AM | Reply

#70 - JPW - swap out "GOP" with "Democratic Party" and ask yourself those very same questions.

#73 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:10 AM | Reply

You don't trust the memo but you want Democrats and the media to start crying about it? You're about as coherent as Trump at this point.

#72 | POSTED BY JOE

I pointed out that Democrats howled over the Nunez memo and, thus far, have been silent (at least that I've seen) about this report.

#74 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:12 AM | Reply

And? So what?

#75 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 12:16 AM | Reply

#70 - JPW - swap out "GOP" with "Democratic Party" and ask yourself those very same questions.

#73 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Yawn.

And you cop out.

But I'm the one who's unraveling. The one who's principles and positions have remained solid throughout Obama and Trump.

The rest of y'all keep every so slowly backing your principles and positions away from where they used to be under the guise of "but the Dems do it too".

Ahhh who am I kidding. You won't or can't see it. It's a rare person who looks at themselves when people around them start acting differently.

#76 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 12:21 AM | Reply

And? So what?

#75 | POSTED BY JOE

I'm trying to read the political tea-leaves. Usually when a report of this nature is released, the opposition party excoriates it, even baselessly. I am surprise and somewhat befuddled by a lack of response from the Democratic Party to this report. Maybe it's forthcoming...

#77 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:25 AM | Reply

JPW -

I've already indirectly addressed your questions, in addition to addressing them directly, throughout the last 20 posts or so.

#78 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:27 AM | Reply

No, you didn't.

No worries. I was expecting a bit of dancing and nothing more.

#79 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 12:29 AM | Reply

Doesn't surprise me at all. When all was said and done, Kavanaugh was a loss for the Dems and a win for Republicans. It would be stupid for Dems to keep his name in the news, especially when it relates to a story manufactured by Grassley that places Kavanaugh in a positive light.

#80 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 12:31 AM | Reply

Actually, I did address them indirectly.

Give me a second and I'll address them directly....

#81 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:31 AM | Reply

#80 | POSTED BY JOE

I mostly agree. Here is where I differ - taken at face value, Dr Ford's testimony was the best Democrats had to derail his nomination. The more scrutiny that has been applied to her and her testimony the more both have been weakened. If Kavanaugh is such a monster, the thought of digging ever-deeper into this should be a rallying cry for impeachment. But all of a sudden it's no longer a subject worth delving into other than innuendo.

#82 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:37 AM | Reply

The more scrutiny that has been applied to her and her testimony the more both have been weakened.

Only in the eyes of people who had no intention of ever believing anything she said in the first place. I've literally never heard or read any objective person take the point of view you just posted. You won't find one to quote either.

#83 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 12:43 AM | Reply

Do you honestly find the GOP to be trustworthy?

No....Do you honestly find the DNC to be trustworthy?

No reason to guess their intentions?

Plenty of reasons to guess their intentions.

They haven't earned derision and the disrespect many throw their way?

Of course they have but far more so from the right than from the left. Conservatives have WAY more the criticize the GOP for than do liberals.

You honestly think they govern in good faith with the best for all behind their thinking and policy?

Positive and negative tradeoffs are integral to just about any and all governance. "Best for all" is a canard.

Explain to me, please, why you place a single ounce of trust or respect in the GOP.

I'm highly skeptical of the GOP. Explain to me, please, why you place a single once of trust or respect in the DNC.

#84 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:44 AM | Reply

Only in the eyes of people who had no intention of ever believing anything she said in the first place. I've literally never heard or read any objective person take the point of view you just posted. You won't find one to quote either.

#83 | POSTED BY JOE

You have a law degree - where does the evidence and witness testimony (all of it - including the new stuff in this report) lead you?

#85 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:46 AM | Reply

Joe,

The new testimonies in this report, to the extent they are to be believed, weaken her claims.

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:53 AM | Reply

#86 You claimed:
The more scrutiny that has been applied to her and her testimony the more both have been weakened.

Suddenly you need to go outside her testimony when challenged on that claim. What "new testimony" is in the report? I'm not going to read all 414 pages.

#88 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 06:31 AM | Reply

We know that is how you will see him, regardless of any and all evidence to the contrary.

Even Republican senators admitted her testimony was credible. Now you want to pretend otherwise, pretend that "Renate Alumni" was a compliment, pretend that Justice Beer Bro didn't lie repeatedly about his past under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee, pretend that he didn't have a big drinking problem and pretend that the Senate investigation was credible when Mark Judge was never called to testify.

Good luck with all that. It's going to be as successful as O.J.'s hunt for the "real killers."

#89 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 08:25 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

No....Do you honestly find the DNC to be trustworthy?

No...I don't lap everything up even to the extent of defending an obvious sham nomination process, "investigation" and decade of bad faith governance. And no, your occasional feeble protest doesn't put you in the camp of skeptic or independent.

Conservatives have WAY more the criticize the GOP for than do liberals.

LOL on what absurd basis do you make this comment on?

Positive and negative tradeoffs are integral to just about any and all governance. "Best for all" is a canard.

Brazenly governing for the benefit of the elite donor class isn't "positive and negative tradeoffs". The GOP is systematically destroying anything that benefits the common citizen in favor of the rich.

And no, don't bother with a feeble "but the Dems do it tooooooo" rebuttal, because it's garbage.

I'm highly skeptical of the GOP. Explain to me, please, why you place a single once of trust or respect in the DNC.

I don't and I regularly make actual criticisms of the Dems, not just enough so I can try to claim a facade of independence.

But at the moment they're the only viable option to put a check on Trump and the far right ----- who are running this country into the ground.

#91 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 09:03 AM | Reply

Just like the faux Russian collusion farce, it's all lies upon lies.

Does it hurt to be a such a gullible old fool?

#92 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 09:04 AM | Reply

Suddenly you need to go outside her testimony when challenged on that claim. What "new testimony" is in the report? I'm not going to read all 414 pages.

#88 | POSTED BY JOE

This is what I am referring to:

Grassley's Friday report also exposed a new inconsistency previously unknown concerning Ford's testimony about the impact of the purported sexual assault. At the Judiciary Committee hearing, Ford testified under oath that the primary effects of the sexual assault happened in "the initial four years after the event." Given Ford's claim that the attack occurred in 1982, that would mean the main after-effects of the assault largely hit her from 1982 until 1986.

Ford expanded on the effects, stating: "I struggled academically. I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in college. When I was 17 and went off to college, I had a very hard time, more so than others, forming new friendships and especially friendships with boys, and I had academic problems."

However, a former college acquaintance told the Judiciary Committee that Ford had "a fairly active and robust social life" in college at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His letter added that Chrissy "seemed to have a number of other non-dating male friends, more guy friends perhaps than females," and that she attended "frat house parties, some crowded and lasting very late in the evening," as well as "smaller gatherings in male friend's rooms or apartments."

Ford "did not seem to be afraid to be in rooms or apartments with only one entrance," the collegemate wrote, adding "This was the case even if very late at night with her and her friend as the only females present."

A woman who attended college with Ford likewise testified that Ford "had an active and robust social life in college," which included using drugs and attending fraternity parties.

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 09:37 AM | Reply

However, a former college acquaintance told the Judiciary Committee that Ford had "a fairly active and robust social life" in college ...

Trying to use this observation to discredit a victim is sick. An acquaintance? Her "social life" was too "robust" for her to be a victim? She had too many male friends to be a victim? This reasoning is utterly depraved. Senate Republicans like Charles Grassley are loathsome.

#94 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 10:28 AM | Reply

Senate Republicans like Charles Grassley are loathsome.

So are their toadies who spread their word.

#95 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 10:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

rying to use this observation to discredit a victim is sick. An acquaintance? Her "social life" was too "robust" for her to be a victim?

It has to do with her actual testimony.

This is what she said:

I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in college. When I was 17 and went off to college, I had a very hard time, more so than others, forming new friendships and especially friendships with boys, and I had academic problems."

That doesn't jive with what was observed by 2 others.

#96 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 10:38 AM | Reply

That doesn't jive with what was observed by 2 others.

#96 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Who cares? Republicans got their POS partisan onto the Supreme Court. What else is there to know?

Let's home America wakes up today and votes blue.

It's our only hope Obi Won Kanobi.

#97 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 10:46 AM | Reply

Nothing in #93 defends or exonerates Kavanaugh. It does very little to discredit Ford since it's purely subjective, and it could have occurred more than four years after the alleged assault.

It's about as valuable as the time Bill Frist diagnosed Terri Schiavo as not being a vegetable.

And it's a little creepy that you won't let yourself see that.

#98 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-06 10:47 AM | Reply

the collegemate wrote

All i needed to see.

Real investigations utilize in-person interviews. I don't care what someone wrote.

#99 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 10:48 AM | Reply

Real investigations utilize in-person interviews. I don't care what someone wrote.

#99 | POSTED BY JOE

However, a former college acquaintance told the Judiciary Committee

#100 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 10:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

That doesn't jive with what was observed by 2 others.

The only thing you're proving is that you don't understand a damn thing about sexual assault victims.

There are girls who were repeatedly raped by their fathers and their mothers didn't know anything was wrong with them. But you're going to sit here and tell us two "acquaintances" can judge whether Ford was making male friends too easily to have been attacked? Utterly depraved.

#101 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 10:57 AM | Reply

#100 they later say he wrote it, so that's apparently how he told them.

Regardless, even if a partisan senate committee took his verbal testimony, that's not a real investigation.

I think it's hilarious you think these partisan committee hearings are anything more than a dog and pony show. You're a little old for this.

#102 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 11:08 AM | Reply

OK, the standards of American Justice. The presumption of innocence. The state must prove guilt. Testimony is examined and cross examined. Any evidence can be challenged. None of these standards were met in the hearings. Beyond Dr Ford's testimony there was nothing of any substance to accuse the Justice with any wrong doing. Additionally, a sexual predictor does not stop. Noting that a majority of the individuals Cavenaugh dealt with over decades were women. Nor one accused him, rather came to his defense. Dr. Ford probity believes her testimony, but 37 years can under mine the accuracy of any memory, especially traumatic events. Don't believe that, review the testimony of the witnesses of the Kennedy assassination, the month of, the year after, and decades after. Believe what you want, but the result is Cavenaugh is now a Justice.

#103 | Posted by docnjo at 2018-11-06 11:09 AM | Reply

Btw, you disappeared from the Social Security thread last night. #SAD!

#104 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 11:10 AM | Reply

But you're going to sit here and tell us two "acquaintances" can judge whether Ford was making male friends too easily to have been attacked?

Twice now you've misrepresented what is being said.

Nobody is saying she was making friends too easily to have been been attacked.

She testified that she had trouble forming friendships, especially with boys.

Yet, two people who knew her at the time observed it quite differently.

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 11:10 AM | Reply

None of these standards were met in the hearings.

Nor could they have been, since this wasn't a real criminal investigation, it was a committee hearing. So why arw you holding this to a standard that doesn't apply? It would be like me demanding they use the scientific method or the pythagorean theorwm.

#106 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 11:11 AM | Reply

Nobody is saying she was making friends too easily to have been been attacked.

Perhaps you should refrain from discussion until you understand the words you are quoting.

The issue is whether she was attacked. The whole point for you to discredit her claim about male friendships is to dispute that she was attacked.

#107 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 11:34 AM | Reply

Thankfully the Senate was able to fully investigate these specious charges and completely exonerate Justice Kavanaugh. It's unjust that his reputation has been wrongfully tarnished. His accuser should face some penalty for her false allegations.

#108 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-11-06 11:42 AM | Reply

Has Dr. Ford filed with the authorities and are they now investigating this? The statute is open. What is she waiting for?

#109 | Posted by Petrous at 2018-11-06 11:44 AM | Reply

Thankfully the Senate was able to fully investigate these specious charges and completely exonerate Justice Kavanaugh.

"Fully"? LOL.

#110 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 11:47 AM | Reply

As no one has claimed it yet, I'll mark this as a win for Kavanaugh and by extension, the GOP.

#111 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-11-06 11:49 AM | Reply

Perhaps you should refrain from discussion until you understand the words you are quoting.

I am quoting them verbatim. You are the one who is trying to change their meaning. Look in the mirror.

The issue is whether she was attacked. The whole point for you to discredit her claim about male friendships is to dispute that she was attacked.

#107 | POSTED BY RCADE

The issue is her testimony, at least as it pertains to this report. 2 people in her social circle dispute her claim that she had difficulty making friends, especially with boys during that time. That apparent contradiction does not mean she wasn't attacked. What it means is she may have been exaggerating the impact the alleged attack had on her psyche. It's kind of like when a victim in an assault case who suffered only a bruised forearm shows up for trial wearing a neck brace and arm in a sling.

#112 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 11:53 AM | Reply

Btw, you disappeared from the Social Security thread last night. #SAD!

#104 | POSTED BY JOE

I went back to that thread and answered your question this morning.

#113 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 11:55 AM | Reply

As no one has claimed it yet, I'll mark this as a win for Kavanaugh and by extension, the GOP.

You're giving the GOP a win because the GOP wrote a report justifying its own actions?

#114 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 11:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"‘I'll mark this as a win for Kavanaugh and by extension, the GOP."

Put it in the same column as the House finding no Russian collusion.

#115 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 11:57 AM | Reply

What it means is she may have been exaggerating the impact the alleged attack had on her psyche.

The only reason to make that ridiculous claim is to discredit her claim Kavanaugh tried to rape her.

Everyone here can see that. Don't run and hide from the implications of what the GOP senators, and by extension yourself, are trying to accomplish.

#118 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 12:00 PM | Reply

I'll mark this as a win for Kavanaugh and by extension, the GOP.
#111 | POSTED BY GONOLES92

And a loss for rape victims.

Why do those two go hand in hand so often?

Grand Old Party of Rape.

#119 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:02 PM | Reply

Turns out that that polygraph test was not only two questions, but neither of them asked her about the attack, only if she believed a written statement was true that she was handed was true (and that Dr. Ford refused to give them the full test or the statement that she was handed):

According to the Judiciary Committee report, Ford and her attorney, Debra Katz, gave the polygraph examiner a written statement they had prepared. After an interview, the examiner then asked Ford two questions: "Is any part of your statement false?" and "Did you make up any part of your statement?"
"Dr. Ford answered no to both questions. The examiner concluded that the test results did not indicate deception," the report said.
The committee report said it requested the full polygraph test along with audio or video recordings of the exam, but Ford "refused" to give them to the committee along with the notes from a therapy session about a past sexual assault that she shared with reporters.

USA Today: Takeaways from report on Kavanaugh allegations
#16 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Actually, the Polygraph was a series of baseline questions.

And the questions asked after are exactly what you said...which is about the attack. "Is any part of your statement false?" How is that NOT about the attack?

#120 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 12:03 PM | Reply

Kavanaugh was too grief stricken about being a rapist, so he skipped the polygraph test.

#122 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:08 PM | Reply

Kanrei was right about problems.

Is he back again?

Always enjoyed reading his posts.

#123 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:09 PM | Reply

One standard of Judgement for Republicans and an entirely different one for Democrats. Just like one standard for incarceration for white criminals and an entirely different one for blacks. Then there's Trump, the special case from hell, an endless string of nonsense that at least 35% of the country swallows.

#124 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-06 12:11 PM | Reply

The only reason to make that ridiculous claim is to discredit her claim Kavanaugh tried to rape her.
Everyone here can see that. Don't run and hide from the implications of what the GOP senators, and by extension yourself, are trying to accomplish.

#118 | POSTED BY RCADE

What you are essentially saying is that she is to be 100% believed - that nothing she testified to is to be scrutinized in any way, shape or form.

She doesn't have a single piece of corroborating evidence. All of her named witnesses, including a lifelong friend (who her team pressured to change her statement) say they have no recollection of the event. Her friend goes a step further and says she has no recollection of ever being at a party with Kavanaugh, with or without Ford present.

#125 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 12:18 PM | Reply

#124 I agree about the incarceration issue - Color is one, income is another. That's a Legislative problem because the Judicial branch has to follow what the lawmakers create.

#126 | Posted by Petrous at 2018-11-06 12:29 PM | Reply

What you are essentially saying is that she is to be 100% believed

Conversely, Jeff.

What you are essentially saying is that no way is she to be believed.

You seem to be of the opinion this is only politics. Because. It's what you and the Republicans would do.

You're projecting your own deviousness onto Ford.

You're projecting the Republican Party's dishonesty onto Democrats. When they're not in the same ballpark.

Republicans are petty angry rapists.

All of you.

#127 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:39 PM | Reply

What you are essentially saying is that she is to be 100% believed - that nothing she testified to is to be scrutinized in any way, shape or form.

What you're saying is that rape victims need to act to your expectations -- and the expectations of their "acquaintances" -- or they weren't raped.

A lot of people do that. Especially men. Some people never learn.

She doesn't have a single piece of corroborating evidence.

She gave the Senate a witness. The pro-rape party didn't call him to testify because they were afraid of what he would say under questioning.

Her friend goes a step further and says she has no recollection of ever being at a party with Kavanaugh, with or without Ford present.

The same friend believes her claim that Kavanaugh attacked her. She knows Kavanaugh better than you do and better than these "acquaintances" you keep citing.

It is completely irrelevant that she doesn't recall the party. She had no reason to remember it because she was not made aware back then of the alleged rape attmept. She had no reason to remember Kavanaugh since he didn't try to rape her, put his dick on her, get blackout drunk or do any of the other things he's been accused of doing by people who knew him back then.

#128 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 12:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Republicans are petty angry rapists.

Be fair. They're not all rapists. Some of them just watch the door.

#129 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 12:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 3 | Newsworthy 1

"What you are essentially saying is that she is to be 100% believed - that nothing she testified to is to be scrutinized in any way, shape or form."

Well, there isn't any real evidence otherwise to hammer Kavanaugh with so that's what we have. She has to be believed.

Who gives a crap if you believe her anyway? Oh wait...apparently some here do care if you believe her or not. Maybe that's part of their problem and why they are attempting to gang rape you on this thread.

It's been a stupid circular argument from the first day this started....and we are in the exact same place and we were then.

Except that it really doesn't matter anymore.

I'm sure I would hate Kavanaugh if I knew the privileged ----- so this is NO defense of him.

Short of assassinating Kavanaugh....I'm not sure what else could have been done.

#130 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-Republicans are petty angry rapists.

It's okay....this issue can be put away so you can go back to insisting they are all racists tomorrow.

#131 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 12:48 PM | Reply

It's been a stupid circular argument from the first day this started....and we are in the exact same place and we were then.

Welcome to politics?

#132 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:48 PM | Reply

Short of assassinating Kavanaugh....I'm not sure what else could have been done.
#130 | POSTED BY EBERLY

So. You've already figured out a solution.

The other solution would have been for Republicans to do the right thing and not seat a rapist on the SCOTUS.

But. Republicans are rapists. It's who they are. And they're proud of it.

#133 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:52 PM | Reply

And the questions asked after are exactly what you said...which is about the attack. "Is any part of your statement false?" How is that NOT about the attack?

#120 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2018-11-06 12:03 PM

I have two polygraph experts that I have known over the years and they were both wondering why the examiner didn't ask her specific questions about the alleged actions themselves. What they asked about was a piece of paper, nothing more, nothing less. So actually, they didn't ask about the attack, but about the statement that she had in her hand.

She won't release the audio, video or actual statement that she viewed to the JC investigators. Think about that for a minute.

#134 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 12:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Okay, let's put aside the hyperbole and address the headline. What evidence was there that Kavanaugh was guilty?

#135 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2018-11-06 12:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's okay....this issue can be put away so you can go back to insisting they are all racists tomorrow.
#131 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Listen stupid. Republicans are racist.

Or perhaps you've had your head up your rear for the past two years?

Perhaps you missed Trump calling Mexicans rapists and criminals, banning people from coming here from 7 nations, stirring up fear of Muslims and immigrants. Praising white supremacists.

The migrant caravan has literally been a dog whistle for deplorable Trumpublicans to make sure they vote republican or else Brown people will come to our country.

Jesus Fkkking Christ. There's so many examples.

If you don't believe the republicans are racist. It's because you're one too and can't see the problem.

#136 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:58 PM | Reply

She won't release the audio, video or actual statement that she viewed to the JC investigators. Think about that for a minute.
#134 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Kavanaugh wouldn't ever submit to a polygraph test.

Kavanaugh wouldn't ever submit to a polygraph test.

Kavanaugh wouldn't ever submit to a polygraph test.

You can deflect all you want RoC. But your rapist friend was so scared he'd get caught lying. He refused to take a polygraph test.

Now. Say something stupid about Ford not releasing hers.

#137 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 01:01 PM | Reply

What evidence was there that Kavanaugh was guilty?

#135 | Posted by MUSTANG

The blistering testemony of the victim and corroborating statements by dozens of witnesses (that were not interviewed by the FBI).

They didn't even interview Kavanaugh for Christs sake.

You actually think this was a legitimate investigation?

Are stupid are you people?

#138 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 01:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What evidence was there that Kavanaugh was guilty?
#135 | POSTED BY MUSTANG

Guilty of rape?

Well it was 1985. So they all used their iPhones to record it and posted the footage to Snapchat.

You fkkking moron.

Apparently, republicans believe rape only occurs when there's documented footage of it available.

#139 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 01:04 PM | Reply

Kavanaugh wouldn't ever submit to a polygraph test.

Why should he, as an Federal Appellate Court Judge he knows they are not admissible evidence because they are not reliable.

Taken in that light, why do you adamantly believe that Dr. Ford's two question polygraph is proof positive that she is right?

#140 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 01:04 PM | Reply

"Are stupid are you people?" should be "Are you people stupid?"

I hate that when that happens...I will hear about it forever now...

#141 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 01:05 PM | Reply

#7
"Jeff's lost his fffking mind if he thinks anyone will ever see Kavanaugh as anything more than a POS rapist."

This statement defines the Left in America and also explains why they keep losing elections. Making up false narratives is bad. IT'S BAD!!! Try to understand that. I can't have any sympathy for a group of people who keep making bad choices.

#142 | Posted by JordyPete at 2018-11-06 01:06 PM | Reply

Why should he, as an Federal Appellate Court Judge he knows they are not admissible evidence because they are not reliable.

Stop deflecting from the fact Kavanaugh refused to take the polygraph test. Because he knew he'd be found guilty.

#143 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 01:07 PM | Reply

Let's put it this way, Clowny:

If Justice Kavanaugh were to take a private polygraph test where he was shown a piece of paper and asked if the statements in it were true, he answered "No" twice and then all that was released was a summary, would you accept it? What if he refused to release the audio, video and statement he looked at?

Go ahead and answer "No" as many times as you need to.

#144 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 01:08 PM | Reply

But. Republicans are rapists. It's who they are. And they're proud of it. - #133 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 12:52 PM

You are finally correct in something. There are Republican rapists. There are Democrat resists. There are male rapists. There are female rapists. There are religious rapists. There are atheist rapists.
Humans are rapists.
Men are rapists.
Women are rapists.
Republicans are rapists.
Democrats are rapists.
And they're proud of it.

#145 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 01:10 PM | Reply

Let's put it this way, Clowny:
If...
#144 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

There's no "if". This isn't a hypothetical. It's reality. He refused the polygraph.

Kavanaugh is a rapist. He's a representation of the Republican Party.

Angry ignorant liars living a life of privilege.

The Supreme Court will be tainted for as long as he sits there.

#146 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 01:14 PM | Reply

"This statement defines the Left in America and also explains why they keep losing elections."

Tonight we will all see how many elections the "Left" (which actually means moderate middle America) keeps losing...

#147 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 01:16 PM | Reply

"Making up false narratives is bad. IT'S BAD!!!"

Meanwhile, today you're voting for the folks making up false narratives about a caravan of refugees.

#148 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 01:17 PM | Reply

By any rational measure the evidence against Kavanaugh and Cosby is identical. What is different is the political power of the two defendants.

By any rational measure Bush, Obama and Trump should be tried for war crimes. If they are tyrants from the former Yugoslavia, Nigeria or Nazis that lost WWII, they are tried, convicted and executed in accordance with those laws which the USA wrote and refuses to abide by, because power trumps justice every time.

Virtually everything coming out of the mouths of Republicans is complete nonsense, including their claims about Kavanaugh. Half the stuff coming out of the mouths of Democrats is just as bad, which puts me in the camp of the lesser evil. What a sad place to be.

#149 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-06 01:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Let's put it this way, Clowny:
If Justice Kavanaugh were to take a private polygraph test where he was shown a piece of paper and asked if the statements in it were true, he answered "No" twice and then all that was released was a summary, would you accept it? What if he refused to release the audio, video and statement he looked at?
Go ahead and answer "No" as many times as you need to.

#144 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

It would certainly help the position that Kavanaugh might be telling the truth and there is certainly insufficient evidence to hold anything against him.

But he didn't do that. Instead, they conducted a series of confidential interviews with several people, ignored corroborating witnesses, and generally did a shoddy investigation to get it over with.

And I've got to remember Kavanaugh lied repeatedly about various details of his high school and college life. Easily disproven lies in fact.

So its pretty hard not to believe Ford at this point.

#150 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 01:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

She gave the Senate a witness. The pro-rape party didn't call him to testify because they were afraid of what he would say under questioning.

He issued a sworn, written statement under threat of perjury. None of the Senate Democrats petitioned the GOP to subpoena him to testify before the committee. I wonder why that was.

#151 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 01:39 PM | Reply

Clown, you never disappoint.

Keep it up.

#152 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 01:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I wish I had time to play with you....but I have to go.

much bigger fish to fry today... ... ... .

#153 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 01:44 PM | Reply

we really need a hysteria flag.

#154 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 01:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And I've got to remember Kavanaugh lied repeatedly about various details of his high school and college life. -#150 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 01:35 PM

What lies are you claiming that Kav made about his high school and college life?
I say that you're lying.
Easily disproven lies in fact.

#155 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 01:49 PM | Reply

"What lies are you claiming that Kav made about his high school and college life?"

Translation: "Let's all pretend we're stupid", and we all didn't witness him make up -------- claims about his yearbook entries.

#156 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 01:50 PM | Reply

He issued a sworn, written statement under threat of perjury. None of the Senate Democrats petitioned the GOP to subpoena him to testify before the committee. I wonder why that was.

#151 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Because they can't. They can only ask the chair nicely to subpoena someone. Welcome to Senate committee rules.

#157 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 01:56 PM | Reply

"Let's all pretend we're stupid"

Its ABigBore's favorite game.

But in his case, he's not pretending.

#158 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 01:56 PM | Reply

Make no mistake

the slavish devotion to "Kav" will inevitably bite all the cretins in the ass, again

as demonstrated here time and time again by the likes of ebertoecentrejeffj, the passage of time is the modern "conservatives" worst enemy.

Much like "democracy building", GW Bush and Kansas economics, they inevitably must run away from it all.

#159 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-06 01:58 PM | Reply

Syco,

My point was they didn't ask the Chair to subpoena Judge.

#160 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 01:59 PM | Reply

Clown, you never disappoint.
Keep it up.
#152 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Thanks buddy. I'll learn you someday.

I wish I had time to play with you....but I have to go.
much bigger fish to fry today... ... ... .
#153 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Toilet get clogged up again? Well, have at it!

we really need a hysteria flag.
#154 | POSTED BY EBERLY

As well as a moron flag. But, thats kinda what the plonk list is.

#161 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 02:00 PM | Reply

and we all didn't witness him make up -------- claims about his yearbook entries.

Which ones?

#162 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:00 PM | Reply

Translation: Danforth's got nothing. #156 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 01:50 PM
Gonna go unpretzel
www.drudge.com or just remain ignorant?

#163 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 02:00 PM | Reply

My point was
#160 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Jeff,

You only have one point.

Ford is lying.

You've made it quite clear that rape victims aren't to ever be believed.

Probably a sign of deeper issues. But who's got time to delve.

#164 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 02:02 PM | Reply

What lies are you claiming that Kav made about his high school and college life?
I say that you're lying.
Easily disproven lies in fact.

#155 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

Wait, really?

Are you that incredibly stupid?

Let's put some Kavanaugh quotes up, shall we?

1. "That yearbook reference was clumsily intended to show affection, and that she was one of us ... It was not related to sex."
Referencing Renate in the yearbook as easy.

2. "That refers to flatulence. We were 16."
Referencing "Boofing". You can look it up.

3. "Drinking game."
Referencing "Devil's Triangle."

4. "But I did not drink beer to the point of blacking out ... Passed out would be -- no, but I've gone to sleep, but -- but I've never blacked out."
Yale classmates said otherwise.

5. "No. Again, I was not aware of that matter in any way whatsoever until I learned it in the media."
Referring to "Memogate", which it turns out he was aware hte documents were stolen in an email from March 23, 2003.

6. "I'm not aware of the memos, I never saw such memos that I think you're referring to. I mean, I don't know what the universe of memos might be, but I do know that I never received any memos and was not aware of any such memos."
His own emails say otherwise.

All of these were under oath.

#165 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 02:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Devil's Triangle - a drinking game
Boof - flatulence

The fact that we are even parsing local teenage slang in the early '80's is so ridiculous it's laughable. Some day you will come to that realization.

#166 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:02 PM | Reply

"Gonna go unpretzel"

Awwww, poor Avigdore is still stuck pretending a parking violation is voter suppression. Just to prove "Dems do it", dont'cha know.

#167 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 02:03 PM | Reply

Yale classmates said otherwise.

They can't possibly know whether or not he blacked out. That is impossible. The only person who knows that is Kavanaugh.

#168 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:03 PM | Reply

"The fact that we are even parsing local teenage slang in the early '80's is so ridiculous it's laughable."

You're right.

And if it was so silly, why did Bart O'Kavanaugh have to lie about it under oath?

#169 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-06 02:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Boof - flatulence"

Makes no sense to post in your yearbook: Judge have you boofed (meaning farted) yet?

#170 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:05 PM | Reply

5. "No. Again, I was not aware of that matter in any way whatsoever until I learned it in the media."
Referring to "Memogate", which it turns out he was aware hte documents were stolen in an email from March 23, 2003.
6. "I'm not aware of the memos, I never saw such memos that I think you're referring to. I mean, I don't know what the universe of memos might be, but I do know that I never received any memos and was not aware of any such memos."
His own emails say otherwise.

That was discussed at length.

www.nationalreview.com

#171 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:05 PM | Reply

If anyone has a high school yearbook, go read some of the crap written in it. I didn't understand half of what was written.

I can't believe how many Irish Catholics used "word".
"It's going to be a great summer. Word!"
"Let's spike the punch and boof! Word!"

The one I didn't get was
"#skisatjeffs".

#172 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-11-06 02:06 PM | Reply

Never mind the fact that former classmates corroborate the definitions for "boof" and "Devil's Triangle".

It's embarrassing that Democrats actually thought parsing high school yearbook entries had anything to do with Kavanaugh's qualifications to be on the bench.

Like I said, some day you are going to realize just how ridiculous this is.

#174 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Stop deflecting from the fact Kavanaugh refused to take the polygraph test. Because he knew he'd be found guilty.

Or that his vitals were consistent with acute alcohol withdrawal.

#175 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 02:10 PM | Reply

#173

Lighten up, Francis.

He was making a joke.

#176 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's embarrassing that Democrats actually thought parsing high school yearbook entries had anything to do with Kavanaugh's qualifications to be on the bench

It's embarrassing that you are unable to connect such simple dots. If the yearbook comments indicated he was a heavy drinker, that would make him a liar and would go directly to his reliability. It would also call into question his ability to remember the events in question. It would have been malpractice not to ask him about the yearbook.

#177 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:12 PM | Reply

It's just not fun anymore.
#173 | POSTED BY PETROUS

Its called humor. As a conservative you simply don't understand it. RCade's comment was true, funny, and illustrates a persistent problem of the republican party and its undying support for rapists, perverts, and pedophiles. Go ---- off to breitbart if this site makes you so salty.

#178 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-11-06 02:12 PM | Reply

It's embarrassing that Democrats actually thought parsing high school yearbook entries had anything to do with Kavanaugh's qualifications to be on the bench.
Like I said, some day you are going to realize just how ridiculous this is.

#174 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

For most nominees it wouldn't but Bart O'Kegerator decided to explicitly perjure himself regarding it; making it central to his lack of qualifications.

#179 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-11-06 02:14 PM | Reply

It's embarrassing that you are unable to connect such simple dots. If the yearbook comments indicated he was a heavy drinker, that would make him a liar and would go directly to his reliability. It would also call into question his ability to remember the events in question. It would have been malpractice not to ask him about the yearbook.

#177 | POSTED BY JOE

He admitted he drank to excess at times.

#180 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:14 PM | Reply

Getting all worked up over high school slang terms is laughable.

#181 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:15 PM | Reply

Bottom line: Kav lied under oath about his drinking.

#182 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

It's sad. It's just not fun anymore.
#173 | POSTED BY PETROUS AT 2018-11-06 02:08 PM | FLAG:

Go cry about it you ------- baby. You're on a leftwing site, not in your town square. Go hang out at Breitbart if you don't want to be deleted.

#183 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:16 PM | Reply

Getting all worked up over high school slang terms is laughable.

#181 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-11-06 02:15 PM | FLAG:

Rapist Coddler.

#184 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-06 02:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#181 Nobody's "all worked up" about them. Stop exaggerating your opponents' position.

#185 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:17 PM | Reply

He's a liar, Jeff, just like the PO(TU)S who appointed him. I believe he also attempted to rape Dr. Ford. He is a stain on the SC and always will be. No GOP concocted report will change that.

#186 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bottom line: Kav lied under oath about his drinking.

#182 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

He admitted he drank. He admitted that at times he drank to excess.

Did he try to downplay it a bit? Yes. Is that the same as lying? Not even close.

#187 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#186 so, no evidence required. Just believe.

#188 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:19 PM | Reply

I think he'll prove to be an excellent addition to the court. I'm pretty pumped up about it.

#189 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:20 PM | Reply

He's also a sniffing, sniveling, over the top angry partisan, who doesn't deserve to be a judge the highest court in the land.

#190 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

He admitted he drank to excess at times.

If he did, it was in evasive language. When asked specifically whether he blacked out, he turned into a raging ------- and never answered the question. If "boofing" meant "drinking a beer through your --------" as it did most other places at the time, it would have helped us answer questions that Brett wouldn't answer.

#191 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:21 PM | Reply

I'm pretty pumped up about it.

Yeah, I bet you are.

#192 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:22 PM | Reply

Making up false narratives is bad.

Your agenda is showing. Ford's testimony is credible, as even Republicans had to admit. Kavanaugh's bad behavior and drinking problem in his youth were well-documented. Calling any of that "false" is itself a dishonest narrative.

#193 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 02:22 PM | Reply

Ford's yearbook would have been scrutinized but she didn't have any friends, so nobody but the gym teacher wrote in it.

"Ha ha! You were always picked last because of your baby voice!"
-The gym teacher

#194 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-11-06 02:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

"#186 so, no evidence required. Just believe."

Her evidence was her testimony, which in her case I did believe, yes. His evidence was his testimony which was belligerent, self-righteous, self-pitying and deceptive.

#195 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A group of Nazis after WWII were unable to find any evidence of the holocaust.

Per Jeffy that means it didn't happen.

#196 | Posted by Tor at 2018-11-06 02:22 PM | Reply

Go hang out at Breitbart if you don't want to be deleted.

I went to Drudge report last week to read some comments.

Literally all of them were some variation on, "DemoRATS LIE!!!"

There was so much anger and stupidity.

Seems like the only moderation policy is you can't post anything factual or you get deleted.

Which is perfect for our resident rightwingers.

You guys seems to be allergic to facts.

#197 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 02:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Did he try to downplay it a bit? Yes.

You're trying really hard to avoid admitting that he lied to the Senate.

He didn't "downplay." He said he never drank that much and never blacked out. Many people who knew him said otherwise. His constant references to kegs and drinking in his youth said otherwise. You don't finish 100 kegs with a small number of friends in a single school year without drinking to excess on many different occasions.

His friend Mark even wrote a book about how much they drank back then, and he admitted later to having an extreme drinking problem.

#198 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 02:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Her evidence was also her willingness to take a lie detector test and her repeated requests for a real FBI investigation. His evidence was his lack of willingness to do either.

#199 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:25 PM | Reply

The same political party who claims the FBI can't be trusted to investigate Trump or Clinton is now claiming the FBI is 100% spot on in its Kavanaugh report?

Say it isn't so!

I tell you what: every agent who worked on that report, EVERY AGENT--release all of their text messages, let me look at them, print them and distribute them to Congress...THEN I'll believe the report. That's the new standard of conduct, right?

#200 | Posted by e1g1 at 2018-11-06 02:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Petrous: Your comments were deleted because your insistence she press charges after 30 years is an insult to rape victims and I'm tired of seeing it.

#201 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 02:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

1. "That yearbook reference was clumsily intended to show affection, and that she was one of us ... It was not related to sex."
Referencing Renate in the yearbook as easy.

4 others in the yearbook who used that statement agreed with him that the statement
"were intended to allude to innocent dates or dance partners". What is your evidence that these 5 people were lying?

2. "That refers to flatulence. We were 16."
Referencing "Boofing". You can look it up.

LA Times reporter Del Quentin Wilber, was a student at that same school a decade later:
"10 years later at Georgetown Prep, students talked about boofing. One meaning was definitely farting."
https://twitter.com/DelWilber/status/1045421183926247430

3. "Drinking game."
Referencing "Devil's Triangle."

LA Times reporter Del Quentin Wilber, was a student at that same school a decade later:
Graduates of the early 1980s also told me Devil's Triangle was a drinking game. It involved three cups of beer and bouncing quarters into them. Prep students played a lot of quarters

A separate 7 witness also claim that it was a drinking game: https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/04/kavanaugh-devils-triangle-boofing/

4. "But I did not drink beer to the point of blacking out ... Passed out would be -- no, but I've gone to sleep, but -- but I've never blacked out."
Yale classmates said otherwise.

No Yale classmate stated that he had blacked out. Or perhaps you have an actual citation? Please disprove this notion that you're lying.

5. & 6. Not during high school or college, which was what you lied about.

#165 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 02:02 PM

#202 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 02:27 PM | Reply

Devil's Triangle - a drinking game
Boof - flatulence
The fact that we are even parsing local teenage slang in the early '80's is so ridiculous it's laughable. Some day you will come to that realization.

#166 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

No.

What's ridiculous is your covering for Kavanaugh lying.

Why are you okay with a Supreme Court Justice nominee lying under oath?
Why should I trust Kavanaugh after he lied under oath to protect himself?

#203 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-06 02:29 PM | Reply

Gal,
After reading the articles on the "lie detector test" why trot that out as evidence that she's right?
Clearly something shady was going on with that test.

That's more damning to me than the two front doors, the fear of flying, etc

Btw, there were men that came out saying they hooked up with a chick at a party that may have been Ford. I don't believe that they were in fact mistaken for Kavanaugh, but I do find it funny that two people came out claiming they were the ones to hook up with Ford.
"Hey, I made out with a chick in high school that wore a bathing suit! I'm going to call the press and clear this whole Kavanaugh thing up..."

#204 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-11-06 02:31 PM | Reply

Kav lied under oath about his drinking. - #182 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:16 PM
Can you cite it? Or is it just something that you feel strongly without evidence?
Here, have a nice transcript:
www.washingtonpost.com

#205 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 02:33 PM | Reply

A group of Nazis after WWII were unable to find any evidence of the holocaust.
Per Jeffy that means it didn't happen.

#196 | POSTED BY TOR

Except that we have plenty of evidence that it happened.

In this case the ONLY evidence we have is Dr. Ford's and her testimony has inconsistencies with her therapist's notes along with info she fed to WaPo.

Further, she appears to have lied about the reason for the second door on her house. According to an ex-boyfriend, she lied about never helping someone prepare for a lie detector.

The hearing had to be pushed back a week because she supposedly had a fear of flying due to being in an enclosed space, yet she flies regularly.

According to a couple of people who were in her social circle while in college she didn't seem to have any difficulties making friends with boys and was very active socially, which is contradictory to what she testified.

Added to that, Kavanaugh's calendar has no entry on it of a party with the names of the people she listed. The only one that comes close - that had both Judge and PJ - was at a house WAY outside the radius she testified that the assault took place.

#206 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:33 PM | Reply

#201 | POSTED BY RCADE

I'm being serious - it was nice of you to provide an explanation.

#207 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:34 PM | Reply

Why are you okay with a Supreme Court Justice nominee lying under oath?

I'm not.

Why should I trust Kavanaugh after he lied under oath to protect himself?

#203 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

Because he didn't lie under oath.

#208 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:36 PM | Reply

He said he never drank that much and never blacked out. Half True. Are you able to quote Kav saying that he never drank that much?
Many people who knew him said otherwise. I assume you mean the blacking out part - Citation?
You don't finish 100 kegs with a small number of friends in a single school year without drinking to excess on many different occasions.
It's a good thing that he never claimed not to have drank to excess. If he had claimed not to have drank to excess (he never made that claim) that would have been a lie.

His friend Mark even wrote a book about how much they drank back then, and he admitted later to having an extreme drinking problem.

#198 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 02:25 PM
It's a good thing that Kav didn't claim that he didn't drink too much then. Because if he had done that (he didn't), that would have been a lie.

#209 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 02:37 PM | Reply

Pathetic Rcade.

It's an insult to every victim that she doesn't press charges.
She let this guy go unpunished for three decades because she didn't speak out.
Now that she has a chance to punish the perp, just let him go.

How many other victims exist because she failed to act and continues to fail to act.

We all know people that were raped. Failing to protect your friends and neighbors is disgusting.
She needs to press charges. I know people hate the thought of it because the result expected from the judicial system doesn't help the underlying issue. But it's the proper place to have the issue dealt with - not at a job interview.

She needs to drag him into court.

#210 | Posted by Petrous at 2018-11-06 02:38 PM | Reply

Her testimony was credible, which was almost universally acknowledged at the time. His testimony, if you can call his angry partisan screed and belligerent responses to questioning testimony, wasn't.

#211 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

Because he didn't lie under oath.
#208 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I get it now.

Jeff lives in a different version of reality.

Too bad he votes in this reality.

#212 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 02:38 PM | Reply

Like Clarence Thomas before him, Kavanaugh's SC tenure will always be accompanied with an asterisk.

#213 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 02:40 PM | Reply

Except that we have plenty of evidence that it happened.

Was there? Lets see your proof.

#214 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 02:41 PM | Reply

Devil's Triangle - a drinking game
Boof - flatulence
The fact that we are even parsing local teenage slang in the early '80's is so ridiculous it's laughable. Some day you will come to that realization.
#166 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

WRONG

Daevil's triangle a 3 way
Boof Pouring alcohol up the keister.

#215 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 02:42 PM | Reply

211
If that was in response to me, I asked about the lie detector test and why it was so shady.

#216 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-11-06 02:42 PM | Reply

Republicans are petty angry rapists.

Be fair. They're not all rapists. Some of them just watch the door.

#129 | Posted by rcade

Hmmmm FF or NW...

#217 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 02:43 PM | Reply

Like I said, some day you are going to realize just how ridiculous this is.

#174 | Posted by JeffJ

Well we certainly know you'll never realize how disgusting the GOP is.

#218 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 02:45 PM | Reply

Daevil's triangle a 3 way
Boof Pouring alcohol up the keister.

#215 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

According to former classmates Devils Triangle was a drinking game and Boof was flatulence.

#219 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:46 PM | Reply

Hmmmm FF or NW...

#217 | POSTED BY JPW

I gave it a FF because it was funny.

#220 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:47 PM | Reply

#215 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 02:42 PM
Are you aware that words can have multiple meanings?
Just because you are ignorant of other meanings that a word may have (and that I have provided citation for above #202), doesn't mean that Kavanaugh is as ignorant of the meanings as you are.

#221 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 02:47 PM | Reply

Well we certainly know you'll never realize how disgusting the GOP is.

#218 | POSTED BY JPW

I think it's exemplary that they didn't kick an accomplished and well respected jurist to the curb over a 36-year old allegation that had inconsistencies, unverifiable "facts" and named witnesses that didn't corroborate the allegation.

#222 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:49 PM | Reply

You think they're exemplary because you're a partisan hack.

Because you agreed that ends justified the means and, therefore, we should believe the notion that he was innocent because the GOP wouldn't allow an assessment of whether he was guilty.

#224 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 02:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#222 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-11-06 02:49 PM | FLAG: Loves Rapists

#225 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-06 02:54 PM | Reply

I think it's exemplary

That's obvious at this point.

#226 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 02:54 PM | Reply

According to former classmates Devils Triangle was a drinking game and Boof was flatulence.

Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:46 PM | Reply

www.urbandictionary.com

Devils Triangle
A threesome with 1 woman and 2 men. It is important to remember that straight men do not make eye contact while in the act. Doing so will question their sexuality.
Larry: Did you hear that Eric and Brian were in a Devils Triangle with Sarah last night?
Brad: Yeah man, I did, what -----.
Larry: No man, its cool, they didn't make eye contact.

www.urbandictionary.com

TOP DEFINITION
Boof drugs
To abuse any licit or illicit substance via insertion into one's rectum.
Dude, I just saw Brian boofing some booze last night at a party. Rad!
#butt funneling#boofing#drugs#boof#boofed#drinking#alcohol
by Beans n rice October 20, 2013

#227 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 02:54 PM | Reply

I gave it a FF because it was funny.

#220 | Posted by JeffJ

I went with NW because righties have turned into accomplices and accessories to any and every monstrosity the GOP is trying to hatch on the public.

#228 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 02:55 PM | Reply

Laura,

Urban dictionary didn't even exist in 1982.

Look up, the walrus. It has a different definition than what I know that slang term to be.

#229 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:57 PM | Reply

Because you agreed that ends justified the means and, therefore, we should believe the notion that he was innocent because the GOP wouldn't allow an assessment of whether he was guilty.

#224 | POSTED BY JPW

The FBI investigated it and stood by how the investigation was conducted.

#230 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:58 PM | Reply

Jeff loves him some rape!
Was that how you met your wife?

#223 | POSTED BY Shack

Jeff? Pffft. He was a door watcher.

#231 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-11-06 02:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

Laura must have a really tough time when she hears about cream pie and Twinkies

#232 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 03:00 PM | Reply

"Petrous: Your comments were deleted because your insistence she press charges after 30 years is an insult to rape victims and I'm tired of seeing it."

Well that just means he doesn't understand the law very well.

Kind of like everybody here that keep insisting that Kavanaugh lied under oath when clearly he did not. He was evasive Under oath and if that Has to continue to be pointed out to people then I would expect you to tire from that as well.

#233 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 03:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Avi loves to eat cream pies his friends make him.

He eats them straight out of the twink's -------.

#234 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 03:03 PM | Reply

#233 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Did you manage to unclog that toilet yet?

#235 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 03:04 PM | Reply

The FBI investigated it and stood by how the investigation was conducted.

Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:58 PM | Reply

The FBI investigation by you guessed it Chick Grassley so it was a dishonest investigation from jump street

#236 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 03:05 PM | Reply

www.vox.com

time.com

Mitch McConnell Says Senate Republicans Set Scope of FBI's Kavanaugh Investigation

(Bloomberg) -- Senate Republicans, not the White House, set the scope of the FBI probe into sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, including the decision not to interview the Supreme Court nominee or accuser Christine Blasey Ford, said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

In an interview shortly before the Senate is set to vote on confirming Kavanaugh, McConnell said GOP members of the Judiciary Committee made the decision in a meeting with two other Republicans who were at the time withholding their support, Senator Susan Collins of Maine and Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Collins later announced she'll back Kavanaugh, while Murkowski opposes confirmation.

#237 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 03:13 PM | Reply

4 others in the yearbook who used that statement agreed with him that the statement"were intended to allude to innocent dates or dance partners".

Sometimes you're as precocious as a newborn.

Has it occurred to you that people who jokingly called a girl easy in a yearbook as teens would not admit it 30 years later as adults with reputations to protect?

The same group of bros had their own underground newspaper where they said girls from that girl's school were so easy "a library card is all it takes."

But keep pretending "Renate alumni" was a compliment, even though the woman herself called what they wrote about her "horrible" and "hurtful." I guess you know better than her, eh?

#238 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 03:14 PM | Reply

Kind of like everybody here that keep insisting that Kavanaugh lied under oath when clearly he did not.

What you "clearly" know is clearly --------. He lied under oath at this hearing and lied under oath at his 2006 hearing.

Here's some of his lies documented:

www.motherjones.com

#239 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 03:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Urban dictionary didn't even exist in 1982.

Look up, the walrus. It has a different definition than what I know that slang term to be.

#229 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 02:57 PM | Reply

OMG Nahhhhhhhhh really???

#240 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 03:22 PM | Reply

239

You poor thing. All you can produce are allegations of lying under oath from years past when you know nobody here just talking about that.

don't you find it interesting that everybody here is clamoring and squawking that Kavanaugh lied under oath during his supreme court nomination hearings in your own link doesn't reference that at all.

But you knew that, or maybe you didn't. In fact, maybe you just haven't noticed.

LOL

#242 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 03:23 PM | Reply

. He was evasive Under oath and if that Has to continue to be pointed out to people then I would expect you to tire from that as well.

#233 | Posted by eberly

Lying under oath is no big deal when Republicans control the Senate. The Republicans would have to charge him with perjury... which would never happen of course. So why didn't the FBI interview him? Because the Republicans in the Senate didn't want to risk Kavanaugh lying under oath to the FBI.

Now THAT is a big deal as it is a federal offense.

#243 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 03:23 PM | Reply

Diner, nobody here needs you to point out the hypocrisy and the agenda of the Republicans and specifically the Senate Judiciary committee

#244 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 03:26 PM | Reply

Kind of like everybody here that keep insisting that Kavanaugh lied under oath when clearly he did not. He was evasive Under oath
#233 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Ohhh, I get it. Thanks for the new spin.

Kavanaugh wasn't lying per se, he was being evasive about telling the truth.

Looks like ROC is rubbing off on you.

#245 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 03:33 PM | Reply

#241 | POSTED BY NARKIFIDIAN

You poor thing.

Show us on the doll where the mean words touched you. Was it in your head?

Why are you even posting on this thread? Theres nothing Lenin or Stalin or Pol Pot can do here.

Perhaps you were simply following around Dirk. You do love attention from him.

#246 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 03:38 PM | Reply

Has it occurred to you that people who jokingly called a girl easy in a yearbook as teens would not admit it 30 years later as adults with reputations to protect?

#238 | POSTED BY RCADE

Has it occurred to you that perhaps they were trying to protect her reputation and her feelings?

Renate Alum had ZERO to do with his confirmation yet she got dragged through the mud because Kavanaugh had to be stopped at all costs.

The fact that Kavanaugh or his friends might have hooked up with her to some extent had ZERO bearing on Ford's testimony.

But hey, she's just collateral damage.

#247 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 03:38 PM | Reply

"According to former classmates Devils Triangle was a drinking game and Boof was flatulence.
#219 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

About the only thing these hearings, and this thread, established is the GOP can count on partisan hacks like you to be willfully dumb enough to believe that.

#248 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-06 03:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

But hey, she's just collateral damage.

Oh look at JeffyLube feigning empathy.

Ford is a lying whore according to Jeff. But lets all be super nice to Renate Alum, lets not hurt her feelings.

#249 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 03:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You find it incredulous that high school kids, back in the early '80's, would name a drinking game Devil's Triangle and flatulence boof?

You are basing the definition of those 2 terms off of a website that was established in 1999, nearly 20 years after these guys, in this school, were using these terms.

#250 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 03:42 PM | Reply

Nobody is saying she was making friends too easily to have been been attacked.
She testified that she had trouble forming friendships, especially with boys.
Yet, two people who knew her at the time observed it quite differently.
#105 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

^
Which means that two people are saying she was making friends too easily to have been been attacked.

#251 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-06 03:43 PM | Reply

"You find it incredulous that high school kids, back in the early '80's, would name a drinking game Devil's Triangle and flatulence boof?"

I find it incredulous that Kavanaugh did that.
And that "Renate Alumnus" isn't a claim of sexual conquest.
And that "FFFF" doesn't mean "Find, Finger. F---, Forget."
And that "Ralph Club" doesn't refer to drinking to excess.
And that "Bart O'Kavanaugh" doesn't refer to "Brett Kavanaugh."

#252 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-06 03:48 PM | Reply

Jeff you can't get around the fact that she passed a polygraph. Kavanaugh refused to take one. Says it all right there.

#253 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 03:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Diner, nobody here needs you to point out the hypocrisy and the agenda of the Republicans and specifically the Senate Judiciary committee

#244 | Posted by eberly

Apparently you do.

Kavanaugh was "evasive" because he could get a way with it.

He would never have gotten away with it during an FBI interview.

So saying he did not lie to the Senate but as "evasive" is disingenuous. He did not get caught lying because the Republicans never followed up on anything questionable. The FBI would have.

#254 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 04:03 PM | Reply

Renate Alum had ZERO to do with his confirmation ...

"Renate alumni" had everything to do with how he treated young women at the time he was accused of trying to rape one.

#255 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 04:04 PM | Reply

#253 | Posted by LauraMohr

When details were given about the examination process, it is clear that wasn't much of a polygraph. Less than five questions?
As Mohr would say, "PffFFFFfffFFFttttTTtTtTtTTTTt!"

#256 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-11-06 04:08 PM | Reply

Jeff you can't get around the fact that she passed a polygraph.

You may have missed this (or hoped we had forgotten):

Turns out that that polygraph test was not only two questions, but neither of them asked her about the attack, only if she believed a written statement was true that she was handed was true (and that Dr. Ford refused to give them the full test or the statement that she was handed), FTA:

According to the Judiciary Committee report, Ford and her attorney, Debra Katz, gave the polygraph examiner a written statement they had prepared. After an interview, the examiner then asked Ford two questions: "Is any part of your statement false?" and "Did you make up any part of your statement?"

"Dr. Ford answered no to both questions. The examiner concluded that the test results did not indicate deception," the report said.

The committee report said it requested the full polygraph test along with audio or video recordings of the exam, but Ford "refused" to give them to the committee along with the notes from a therapy session about a past sexual assault that she shared with reporters.

I later post this:

I have two polygraph experts that I have known over the years and they were both wondering why the examiner didn't ask her specific questions about the alleged actions themselves. What they asked about was a piece of paper, nothing more, nothing less. So actually, they didn't ask about the attack, but about the statement that she had in her hand.

She won't release the audio, video or actual statement that she viewed to the JC investigators. Think about that for a minute.

Do you really think that polygraph proves anything? If so, then why won't she release it to investigators?

#257 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 04:08 PM | Reply

Turns out that that polygraph test was not only two questions

So, two more polygraph test questions than Kavanaugh.

Got it.

Thanks!

#258 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 04:16 PM | Reply

"She won't release the audio, video or actual statement that she viewed to the JC investigators. Think about that for a minute."

Republicans are still in charge of the JC. So if you think about that for less than a minute you will know why it was pointless for her to release anything to the JC. As I understand it though, she was willing to cooperate with the FBI.

No matter how you want twist it Jeffy the People have been bamboozled again.

#259 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 04:18 PM | Reply

#257 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Don't you think its embarrassing to keep reminding everyone that Kavanaugh refused to take to polygraph?

#260 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 04:18 PM | Reply

Vote Blue!

Don't let the haters run the old okie-doke on us again.

#261 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 04:20 PM | Reply

Sometimes you're as precocious as a newborn.
Has it occurred to you that people who jokingly called a girl easy in a yearbook as teens would not admit it 30 years later as adults with reputations to protect?
#238 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2018-11-06 03:14 PM

Let's do a little thought experiment. Let's assume for a moment that you are right, and all 4 of these men know that Kav is lying.
They have 3 choices:
1- They can tell the truth. Some portion of America already thinks they are guilty regardless of what they say or do. I'm going to be conservative and say 20%. If they come clean, they take the 'hit' to their reputation that 30 years ago as teenagers they acted like dumb teenagers, they show their remorse and their growth by 'doing the right thing' and keeping a perjurer off of the supreme court. They would be hailed as heroes by much of the country.
2- They can all lie about it. This means that they each individually accept the fact that an actual perjurer is going to be sat on the SC, they know that they are already going to be disbelieved by those who won't do any investigation into the evidence provided. All to protect their reputation from being 'the guys who acted like asses in highschool 35 years ago'.
3- They do nothing. When contacted by the media/SJC they make no comment/I don't recall. Nobody in the world would even know their name. This still means that they allow a perjurer onto the court.

Do you honestly think that all 4 of these people would make the same decision to lie to the SJC, under penalty of perjury, & knowingly sit a perjurer instead of 3?
And that's IF you're right.

#262 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 04:26 PM | Reply

"Renate alumni" had everything to do with how he treated young women at the time he was accused of trying to rape one.

POSTED BY RCADE AT 2018-11-06 04:04 PM | REPLY

Absolutely. It goes to the state of how he treated women back in the day. His FFFF says a lot as well.

#263 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-11-06 04:29 PM | Reply

#260

Not at all, because it is not reliable.

Please try to comprehend my posts next time.

#264 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 04:29 PM | Reply

Here's some of his lies documented: #239 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2018-11-06 03:16 PM |
What, precisely, is your explanation for why the Obama administration allowed this known perjurer to sit on the bench and not do any investigation of all of these lies?
I'm going with the obvious choice: The Obama administration knows more that 'Mother Jones' and realize that he didn't lie under oath, but please...tell me your version of it.

#266 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-06 04:31 PM | Reply

because it is not reliable.

Stop the Judiciary system!! RoC has had a revelation!!

Polygraph tests are unreliable!

Kavanaugh, I'm sure, will be the first to join the bandwagon to eliminate them.

Considering he refused to take one, even though Dr. Ford did.

#267 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 04:34 PM | Reply

#262 | POSTED BY ABIGSNORE

If it weren't for disingenuous, leading questions, ABigBore would have nothing to add to conversation.

#268 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 04:36 PM | Reply

Something ain't right about your boy Kav, and many women who watched the hearings know it:

I'll Never Forget Brett Kavanaugh's Anger

I saw a frightening side of him in 1998. I saw it again at the Christine Blasey Ford hearing 20 years later.

slate.com

#269 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 04:47 PM | Reply

"and many women who watched the hearings know it:"

Call it a gut instinct. You know, like the one Trump is so famous for employing.

#270 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-06 04:52 PM | Reply

Don't you think its embarrassing to keep reminding everyone that Kavanaugh refused to take to polygraph?

#260 | Posted by ClownShack

You know.. I thought I heard someone Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph!

I swear someone said that Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph!

I am pretty sure someone said Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph.

Did Kavanaugh refuse to take a polygraph? That's what the people are saying, "Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph!"

So I guess it is true then that Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph.

Oh well, if they say Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph then he obviously refused to take a polygraph!

#271 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 05:15 PM | Reply

"refused to take a polygraph"

*drink*

#272 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 05:31 PM | Reply

*drink*

#272 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2018-11-06 05:31 PM | FLAG:

Keep that up and Trump might make you a judge!

#273 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-06 05:40 PM | Reply

"Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph"

Wait... did in mention Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph?

I am pretty sure I mentioned that Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph.

But, if I forgot, Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph!

#274 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-06 05:42 PM | Reply

"Kavanaugh refused to take a polygraph!"

*drink*

If that is all you freaks got at this point, have fun with it.

#275 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 05:58 PM | Reply

If that is all you freaks got at this point, have fun with it.
#275 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Yep.

Pointing out Kavanaugh is a rapist who only got seated because Republicans are corrupt...

Is all us freaks got at this point.

And it's been a lot of fun rubbing your partisan nose in it.

You literally only support the rapist because he's a Republican.

#276 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 06:02 PM | Reply

"You literally only support the rapist..."

Who did he actually rape again...?

Oh that's right, he didn't rape anyone.

And it's been a lot of fun rubbing your partisan noses in it.

You literally only call him a rapist because he's a Republican.

#277 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 06:07 PM | Reply

"Who did he actually rape again...?"

Righto is fine with attempted rape.

#278 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-06 06:08 PM | Reply

Who did he actually rape again...?

Well, for you to actually discuss this topic you'll have to stop pretending Dr Ford is lying.

Because according to Kavanaugh. Nothing happened ever. He only went to school and church.

#279 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-06 06:17 PM | Reply

Guys, please.

It didn't even say "rape" on his calendar.

He's in the clear.

#280 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 06:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#279

Non-answer noted.

Thanks for confirming my point.

#281 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 06:40 PM | Reply

Exit polls show 48% of votes oppose Kavanaugh's nomination and 43% support.

How can that be when two acquaintances said she seemed to make male friends easily in college?

#282 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 06:41 PM | Reply

Oh that's right, he didn't rape anyone.

Your certainty shows that your opinion is about an agenda, not a good-faith attempt to seek the truth.

She made a credible accusation. She named people at the party who matched the same people at a party Kavanaugh noted on his private diary -- something she could not have seen when she made her accusation. She did a polygraph. She testified under oath. Multiple people and Kavanaugh's own testimony, diary and yearbook reveal he had a drinking problem that likely included blackout incidents.

Put all this together and anyone who makes an absolute declaration he didn't sexually assault Ford is just parroting a party line.

#283 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 06:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#283. The house that party was held at was a townhouse, which is not what she described and was situated roughly 10 miles away from the radius she testified the alleged attack occurred. There were also other names listed at that party that she didn't mention.

#284 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-06 06:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

not a good-faith attempt to seek the truth.

I actually read the 28 page (but not the exhibits) JC investigation report, you obviously haven't. It covers what they did before Dr. Ford's accusations, talks about the 17 witnesses (gasp) that the FBI interviewed after they reopened the investigation and the additional 45 witnesses that were interviewed and 25 sworn statements that they got regarding all of the allegations. They also list out, with redactions, what all those people said.

Guess what? No one confirms Dr. Ford's account...not her boyfriend of six years, not her longtime best friend...no one other than her husband and some acquaintances who were not there who heard about it 30 years later.

As for the polygraph, she refused to give it to either the FBI or the JC investigators. Why do you think she (more likely her lawyers) refused that request? If she felt strongly about it one would think that she would gladly turn it over.

As for drinking in HS and College...let he who is without guilt cast the first stone.

Put all this together and anyone who makes an absolute declaration he undoubtedly sexually assaulted Ford is just parroting a party line.

#285 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 07:08 PM | Reply

#285 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

You're making a strict technical legalise argument.

She's still credible ... humanity, counselor, don't forget to factor in humanity into your logic.

#286 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-11-06 07:19 PM | Reply

humanity, counselor, don't forget to factor in humanity into your logic.

#286 | POSTED BY PINCHALOAF AT 2018-11-06 07:19 PM | FLAG:

Who says he's got any?

#287 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-06 07:23 PM | Reply

#286

I get that and thought she was credible and that she was groped one night in HS. I just have a reasonable doubt as to who did it and to me the evidence supports that doubt.

Most of the people on the DR Left have no doubt who did it, and I get that as well.

#288 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 07:45 PM | Reply

I love when Kavanaugh -------- use the term "groped" to describe Blasey-Ford's allegations, like a rowdy customer slapping a Hooters waitress' ass when she walks by. It intentionally rounds it down to something that isn't at all what she described.

#289 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-06 07:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#148 - "Meanwhile, today you're voting for the folks making up false narratives about a caravan of refugees."

So, what you are saying is that there's no caravan of immigrants.
The false narrative is that they are refugees. If they were, they'd stay in Mexico.

#290 | Posted by JordyPete at 2018-11-06 07:51 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

As for drinking in HS and College...let he who is without guilt cast the first stone.

Most people didn't drink to the point they blacked out and couldn't remember their actions.

That's what Kavanaugh was accused to have done by several people who knew him. Some even said he became physically aggressive when drunk.

Guess what? No one confirms Dr. Ford's account...

This is a deflection. Ford, Kavanaugh and Judge are the only people who could confirm the attempted rape.

Several people close to Ford were told about the allegation a long time ago, far before Kavanaugh was a Supreme Court hopeful and when she'd have no reason to lie about it. You are ignoring that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

#291 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 07:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

The false narrative is that they are refugees. If they were, they'd stay in Mexico.

Refugees don't stop being refugees if they pass through a country to get to another. Do you think Syrian war refugees stopped being refugees if they crossed a second border to escape the war? That's an absurd claim.

#292 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-06 07:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- Most of the people on the DR Left have no doubt who did it, and I get that as well.

Dr. Ford has no doubt who did it, which is something you don't get as well.

#293 | Posted by Corky at 2018-11-06 08:06 PM | Reply

Kavanaugh wrote a judicial opinion in which he says polygraph tests are useful in law enforcement.

That's the best explanation for why he won't take one.

It will show the truth; same as Ford's polygraph.

#294 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-06 09:14 PM | Reply

I love when Kavanaugh -------- use the term "groped" to describe Blasey-Ford's allegations

The right has been reduced to nothing but lies and distortions.

They're so used to their own stench they don't realize that the looks people give them are because of them.

#295 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-06 09:18 PM | Reply

-As for drinking in HS and College...let he who is without guilt cast the first stone.

Which is why the outrage over this is totally partisan. It's phony as are most posters here on this issue.

I'm 49. I've never been into any trouble in my adult life. I'm a social drinker but no issues related to any part of my life. Personal, professional, marital, etc.....

but I drank beer in high school and college. Did I ever drink too much, be an -------, get sick, even blackout once? Yes....guilty as charged.

Maybe you could understand if I think how much I drank in high school or college to be none of your ------- business.

Now, I'm not asking for a SCOTUS appointment and I get that's totally different......but a privileged ----- like Kavanaugh would certainly believe it's none of our business. Either find something in the last 20 years or so related to alcohol or STFU.

I was all for the investigation, the questions, all of it. and if Kavanaugh's appointment had been stopped over this....fine with me. Plenty of other qualified candidates to get for this.

But the butthurt over this should go away.

It's all fake anyway.

#296 | Posted by eberly at 2018-11-06 09:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Several people close to Ford were told about the allegation a long time ago, far before Kavanaugh was a Supreme Court hopeful and when she'd have no reason to lie about it. You are ignoring that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Really? Name them, I am sure the FBI, JC, her ex boyfriend, her longtime best friend and everyone who was supposedly at that party will disagree with you.

#297 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 11:48 PM | Reply

Dr. Ford has no doubt who did it, which is something you don't get as well.

#293 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2018-11-06 08:06 PM

Good to know, because her best friend, ex boyfriend and the people who were supposed witnesses to this alleged sexual assault don't agree with her. But even though you weren't there, you are sure that they are wrong.

#298 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-06 11:59 PM | Reply

Dr. Ford has no doubt who did it, which is something you don't get as well.
#293 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2018-11-06 08:06 PM
Good to know, because her best friend, ex boyfriend and the people who were supposed witnesses to this alleged sexual assault don't agree with her. But even though you weren't there, you are sure that they are wrong.
#298 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2018-11-06 11:59 PM

It's amazing how people can misconstrue or outright lie to "defend" their position.

Ford is not lying. Bart does.

The only other witness I recall her mentioning was Judge. He doesn't remember anything about the event other than what his books delineate. Fords polygraph and therapists notes do.

Kavanaugh was scooted through without a serious investigation and you know it.

#299 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-11-07 12:23 AM | Reply

"It's amazing how people can misconstrue or outright lie to "defend" their position."

Not if those people are RapeOcenter.

#300 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-11-07 12:29 AM | Reply

Kavanaugh was scooted through without a serious investigation and you know it.

Conceding that for the sake of argument, read the 28 pages (if you dare) linked at #285 and tell me what is missing.

I'll wait.

#301 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-07 12:30 AM | Reply

Conceding that for the sake of argument, read the 28 pages (if you dare) linked at #285 and tell me what is missing.
I'll wait.

#301 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCorky

Right back it.

#302 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-07 12:40 AM | Reply

The house that party was held at was a townhouse, which is not what she described and was situated roughly 10 miles away from the radius she testified the alleged attack occurred.

So you're now a Zillow detective like Ed Whelan?

Jesus. Just say you think she's lying and nothing will convince you otherwise. Stop beclowning yourself by pretending it matters how she described the house at which she was allegedly attacked, how many friends she did or did not make in college, how she got home that night, yadda yadda yadda puke.

You are beginning to sound like people who always disbelieve rape victims. Nothing they say is ever sufficient. Nothing they do afterwards or tell people is ever convincing.

That attitude is why so many victims never come forward and their rapists never face justice. Women know they won't be believed.

#303 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-07 12:23 PM | Reply

Do you believe Crystal Magnum, Rcade?

#304 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 12:31 PM | Reply

It's an insult to every victim that she doesn't press charges.

Yeah, and every black person mistreated by cops should press charges because that always goes so well for them.

It's sleazy for you to malign an alleged rape victim because of your naiveté about cops and justice.

Nobody is going to file a 30-year-old rape charge against someone who just got appointed to the Supreme Court. If Senate Republicans didn't care to conduct a real investigation when the eyes of the entire world were on them, the local prosecutor and police aren't going to care.

#305 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-07 12:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What is amusing to me is that you are citing that calendar entry as proof of Ford's claim and then get mad when I point out how it's NOT the smoking gun based upon her own fricking testimony regarding the geographic radius in which the attack supposedly occurred. You've got a very weird standard for #WeBelieve.

#306 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 12:35 PM | Reply

Do you believe Crystal Magnum, Rcade?

Is this attempt to derail the discussion an acknowledgement of the weakness of your position?

#307 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-07 12:35 PM | Reply

What is amusing to me is that you are citing that calendar entry as proof of Ford's claim ...

I didn't call it proof.

#308 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-07 12:36 PM | Reply

"What is amusing to me is that you are citing that calendar entry as proof of Ford's claim and then get mad when I point out how it's NOT the smoking gun based upon her own fricking testimony regarding the geographic radius in which the attack supposedly occurred. You've got a very weird standard for #WeBelieve."

It's possible Kav and the others started out at one location and then moved to another which was within the radius Ford described.

#309 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-07 12:37 PM | Reply

Is this attempt to derail the discussion an acknowledgement of the weakness of your position?

#307 | POSTED BY RCADE

It was a rhetorical question. You come across as expecting she is to be believed at all costs with zero scrutiny. It doesn't work that way. The Duke Lacrosse case is an example.

#310 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 12:55 PM | Reply

It was a rhetorical question. You come across as expecting she is to be believed at all costs with zero scrutiny.

I've never said anything like that. I've just reacted to anti-victim arguments you've put forward that are less about pursuing the truth and more about avoiding any consideration of it.

#311 | Posted by rcade at 2018-11-07 12:59 PM | Reply

JJ is beyond absurd. On the one hand he pretends that an old trauma event must be remembered precisely or else the accuser must be lying. It is ridiculous to think any 15 year old who isn't driving yet, will remember a distance correctly for a forty year old event. At the same time JJ completely ignores Kavanaugh's serial lying about the meaning of words in his yearbook and calendar which place him at scenes consistent with Ford's allegation. It is even more ridiculous for anyone to think that given the fact that she knew Kavanaugh this could be a case of mistaken identity, as most Republicans pretend.

We know Kavanaugh is a serial liar, just like Trump. We know he has a temper just from his testimony and which is dangerously aggravated while under the influence of alcohol because so many roommates and friends from his life have testified to that fact. Unless he has sworn off alcohol he is a dangerous angry seat on the Supreme Court. But we know he still loves beer so forget that.

Worst of all he has a track record of putting the best interests of Corporations over human beings, while pretending to be another constitutional originalist, as defined by the Federalist Society. This is an insane position because nowhere in the constitution is a business or corporation ever mentioned. NOWHERE. The Constitution and Bill of Rights deals with the responsibilities of Government and the rights of human beings. Originalists like Scalia and Kavanaugh are FoS.

#312 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-07 01:48 PM | Reply

Kavanaugh supporters only support the inept rapist because he's a good ol white boy Republican.

If he were a democrat, all the people supporting him would despise him.

If he were a democrat, he would never have gotten appointed.

#313 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-11-07 01:53 PM | Reply

JJ completely ignores Kavanaugh's serial lying about the meaning of words in his yearbook

Multiple former classmates confirmed that in their social circle "boof" was flatulence and "Devil's Triangle" was a drinking game.

and calendar which place him at scenes consistent with Ford's allegation.

It does the opposite, actually.

Worst of all he has a track record of putting the best interests of Corporations over human beings, while pretending to be another constitutional originalist, as defined by the Federalist Society. This is an insane position because nowhere in the constitution is a business or corporation ever mentioned. NOWHERE. The Constitution and Bill of Rights deals with the responsibilities of Government and the rights of human beings. Originalists like Scalia and Kavanaugh are FoS.

#312 | POSTED BY BAYVIKING

That is simply Danni-syndrome. Corporate personhood was established more than a century ago. It is absolutely absurd to blame any of the current justices for it.

#314 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 01:58 PM | Reply

I've just reacted to anti-victim arguments you've put forward that are less about pursuing the truth and more about avoiding any consideration of it.

#311 | POSTED BY RCADE

Scrutinizing what she has said is all about pursuing the truth. Blindly accepting what she has said is....

#315 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 01:59 PM | Reply

"Kavanaugh was scooted through without a serious investigation and you know it."
Conceding that for the sake of argument, read the 28 pages (if you dare) linked at #285 and tell me what is missing.
I'll wait.
#301 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2018-11-07 12:30 AM

414 pages. Where is any data on Kavanaugh's drinking - he was known to keep kegs in his room, why isn't that included? It's not against school policy? Is there anything about the police interactions during that time, particularly relating to drinking and allegations of sexual misconduct? Or any examination about the misogynist language used in the yearbook? What about "Bart" - was that name correlated or just ignored? Maybe they never found that data or maybe it was excluded.

Remember what Bart claims - "you'll have to ask Judge why he used the name Bart Kavanaugh", and then we see he signs documents BART. Unbelievable how stupid Republicans are for expecting everyone to believe that was a real hearing on a real candidate for SCOTUS, let alone backed by a real background investigation performed by the best and brightest. Because it obviously wasn't.

So MANY of Kavanaugh's own compatriots - people who know of and witnessed his behavior of black-out drinking have come forward to express that he LIED during the hearing. LIED. His youngest child asked to pray for Ford - so glad he brought that up during the hearing as it brings so much more veracity to the truth.

Do you know what questions the extra-virgin Bart came up with for the Clinton hearings? They were rather specifically disgusting. That is what Kavanaugh represents.

What about the rest of his BushCo legislation? Why is 99% of his time spend in servitude to a pro-torture White House scrubbed? Why was that not brought forward to assess his capacity for fair and non-bias behavior?

He is in favor of repealing Roe v Wade and it's happening already. That's just a sideshow considering how horrific he actually is toward women and human life in general. He forced a young woman to carry a baby to birth that she had wanted to abort before it was too late - Kavanaugh forced her to wait until medical help was no longer viable. This isn't the first time he's forced himself will upon a women and I don't believe Republicans care one whit. Each Republican representative was petitioned and ignored the largest protest of a SCOTUS in history.

Lastly, McConnell was given a document at the same time as Ford's. One signed by professionals and personal acquaintances of Kavanaugh that describe these behaviors and warn against his confirmation - that wasn't mentioned ONE TIME during the hearing.

414 pages of background investigation and the words 'police', 'drinking', 'alcohol' and 'allegation' are not mentioned even one time. Literally, any means of describing the problems we are aware of have been omitted.

Whatever the FBI have done is not good enough to satisfy even cursory examination, let alone square with Kavanaughs outlandish, obscene performance during the hearing. They produced 414 pages excluding specific data we know exists.

Also, I allege that Ford was not Kavanaugh's first victim. He knew enough to smother her screaming.

#316 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-11-07 02:15 PM | Reply

Thanks for the detailed response RLR, but if HS and College drinking is all you got (other than the hysteria about repealing Roe, which won't happen), then nothing that any investigation comes up with will ever change your mind about Justice Kavanaugh.

#317 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-07 02:28 PM | Reply

other than the hysteria about repealing Roe, which won't happen

It'll happen slowly, and the question is if Roberts can stop it.

#318 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-11-07 02:36 PM | Reply

#318

As I have stated previously, I think he can and will, he doesn't want that as his legacy.

#319 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-07 02:39 PM | Reply

"nothing that any investigation comes up with will ever change your mind about Justice Kavanaugh."

Is that not the position you find yourself in too?

#320 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-07 02:39 PM | Reply

You come across as expecting she is to be believed at all costs with zero scrutiny. It doesn't work that way. The Duke Lacrosse case is an example.

#310 | Posted by JeffJ

"Zero scrutiny" ... as in no FBI interview? If there was "zero scrutiny" that was the Republicans choice. So Deplorables like you could continue to beat on this dead horse until it was a bloody pulp.

#321 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-07 02:40 PM | Reply

"Zero scrutiny" ... as in no FBI interview?

As set forth in the report, the prior 6 interviews and his sworn testimony before the JC was deemed, by the FBI, to be sufficient.

Next?

#322 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-07 02:50 PM | Reply

the prior 6 interviews and his sworn testimony before the JC was deemed, by the GOP, to be sufficient.

^
Edited for accuracy.

#323 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-11-07 03:16 PM | Reply

JJ, I don't disagree with the argument that there is legal precedent in the USA for Corporate personhood. I'm simply stating that, like slavery, it is an incorrect decision which needs to be reversed. Its really an important part of the ongoing class war against unions in particular and everyone that works for a living. Corporations will always have more money than people. The USA has been set up in such a way that access to public political discourse must be bought and paid for. This gives deep pockets a ridiculous political advantage which has systematically destroyed any semblance of democracy.

As far as the Ford-Kavanaugh dispute is concerned we can say there is a small chance Ford is deliberately lying and a fair amount of cooberating evidence that she is not, some of it even provided by Kavanaugh. It is absolutely certain that Kavanaugh lied throughout the hearing and displayed behavior consistent with the many people who know him personally and attest to his belligerent behavior while drunk. Otherwise, the evidence against him is just unreliable eye witness testimony, nothing else, just like Cosby, who was convicted of sexual assault. Ford is clearly not a Tawana Brawley.

It is a monstrous tragedy that our political system is occupied by scum like Kavanaugh, Trump, Menendez and Hastert... its a long disgusting list which tells us about the qualities in people able to rise to the top and foreshadows our continued decline.

#324 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-07 03:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#324 | POSTED BY BAYVIKING

I gave you a NW for quality clarification.

#325 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-07 03:49 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort