Kavanaugh SCOTUS Senate Judicial Hearing

[imported_tajmahal]

She characterized her attack as "attempted rape".

As far as a dick in your ass, note the word "try". I doubt the tearing off of her clothes was to check for tattoos. Substantially similar attack to illustrate why an event would leave an indelible memory image

Last, you said

because you wouldn't be able to remember the names of women you "dated" 35 years ago. My rebut was this was more then a "date" according to her.

You make it sound as if he tore off her clothes, which he never did and never happened.

" I doubt the tearing off of her clothes was to check for tattoos. "

 

[UberNeuman]

You make it sound as if he tore off her clothes, which he never did and never happened.

lol.

 

[HomerJS]

Letter issued on behalf of eyewitness according to Ford, Mark Judge

 

[imported_tajmahal]

A brisket?

He can always be subpoened if you think it would help, but his reply that he never saw Judge Kavanaugh act like that is testimony that it didn't happen.

Letter issued on behalf of eyewitness according to Ford, Mark Judge

 

[HomerJS]

You make it sound as if he tore off her clothes, which he never did and never happened.

" I doubt the tearing off of her clothes was to check for tattoos. "

Go to a dictionary and look up the following
substantially
similar

Neither one of us know if her attack happened, that's why it needs to be investigated.

 

[HomerJS]

A brisket?

He can always be subpoened if you think it would help, but his reply that he never saw Judge Kavanaugh act like that is testimony that it didn't happen.

Ok I made a mistake. You caught what I did this past weekend. Just admit you were impressed

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Go to a dictionary and look up the following
substantially
similar

Neither one of us know if her attack happened, that's why it needs to be investigated.

At no time did she claim he tore her clothes off. They are not the same or even similar. And I wish it would be investigated fairly and impartially. I just don't know if it's possible with the charged political world we live in to have fair and impartial hearings any longer. Much to my dismay.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Ok I made a mistake. You caught what I did this past weekend. Just admit you were impressed

I was, it looked freaking great! Seriously good.

 

[HomerJS]

I was, it looked freaking great! Seriously good.

I need to report in to Ponyo

 

[Starbuck1975]

You are confusing pity with anger, but yes, there they go again. The Dems keep expecting people who identify as pro-life not to make death threats.

There is no excuse for death threats. Susan Collins’s staff is receiving rape threats. There are a lot of scumbags heavily vested in who gets this SCOTUS seat, to include the person or people that threw Ford into the line of fire. They are perhaps the worst scum because she clearly did not want this.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Letter issued on behalf of eyewitness according to Ford, Mark Judge

Judge does not stand accused of any crime. He is the only identified eyewitness. The only risk he introduces to himself at this point is to lie about the incident because he does not know what other evidence might exist.

 

[FIVR]

Letter issued on behalf of eyewitness according to Ford, Mark Judge

Lol. Not exactly a virulent defense of Kavanaugh and it confirms that Mike Judge (notorious drunk and drug addict) was in fact best friends with Kavanaugh during the period of the rape. He's afraid to testify in front of the senate too, which doesn't exactly help Kavanaugh either.

It's not like Mike Judge would remember assisting in one of "Slime-ball" Kavanaugh's attempted rape schemes. He was probably black out drunk, as usual. So this just helps Ford's case against Kavanaugh and means the FBI must get involved.


Kavanaugh is done for. Hopefully he gets impeached from his position as Federal Judge too.

 

[boomerang]

Just read that another woman has come forward saying that Kavanaugh sucked her nipples in 1965. I'll supply a link when I find a better source.

 

[Atreus21]

Is there any level of depravity you'd forgo in your pursuit of banning legal abortion?

No I'm afraid I am terribly depraved. So depraved that I don't want an obvious delaying tactic to be given any more weight than it requires.

 

[brycejones]

Just read that another woman has come forward saying that Kavanaugh sucked her nipples in 1965. I'll supply a link when I find a better source.

So he has been closer to a boob than you'll ever be?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Not going to testify until after an official FBI investigation? That changes the dynamic as this is now a trap for them. Damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't think they are going to stick their necks out unless there is compelling evidence to become involve in a political dispute.

So the accuser isn't going to testify, she looks bad now as her changing her mind and insisting something that isn't likely to happen. Well, that's a fork in her IMO. Whether her involvement prevents Kavanaugh from getting in remains to be seen but this is even more a cluster.

What needs to happen are rules that cannot be waved, such as a minimum time to evaluate candidates and deadlines for evidence and documentation as well as the kinds of materials that must be provided.

 

[cytg111]

What a shitshow.
What a delicious shitshow.
What a delicious delicious shitshow.
And Trump considering cutting him loose cause midterms.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH...................... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[FIVR]

Trump would be smart to cut this probable attempted rapist and find another anti-abortion hack lawyer, of which there must be hundreds if not thousands who would gladly take his place.


The reason he wants Kavanaugh is because he has the most expansive view of Presidential power and he has established opinions that a President is not subject to being indicted or subpoenaed. However I'm sure McConnel would gladly throw out Kavanaugh for another pick, and any hack judge is better than none.

Kavanaugh is done for either way, as it should be. Either he is replaced or his nomination goes down in flames when Collins and Murkowski refuse to vote for him. He needs to be investigated by the FBI immediately.

 

[HomerJS]

Wonder if the Dems have the raw FBI report on Kavanaugh. Remember Rob Porter? There were clues in his report of spousal abuse but White House kept it hidden.

 

[K1052]

Not going to testify until after an official FBI investigation? That changes the dynamic as this is now a trap for them. Damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't think they are going to stick their necks out unless there is compelling evidence to become involve in a political dispute.

So the accuser isn't going to testify, she looks bad now as her changing her mind and insisting something that isn't likely to happen. Well, that's a fork in her IMO. Whether her involvement prevents Kavanaugh from getting in remains to be seen but this is even more a cluster.

What needs to happen are rules that cannot be waved, such as a minimum time to evaluate candidates and deadlines for evidence and documentation as well as the kinds of materials that must be provided.

The letter said there "should" be an FBI investigation not that there "must" be one. I wouldn't necissarily take that as "I'm not coming Monday unless one is done".

GOP is obviously latching on to the request as a lifeline to push forward without a hearing. Maybe she comes, maybe she doesn't. I wouldn't wager one way or the other.

Edit: Also I find the Repulbican claim that the FBI couldn't and would not look into this kind of hilarious since that's what happened the last time. Yes they could if asked and some of these guys were in the Senate when that happened. Is it going to be requested this time...no way.

 

[HomerJS]

The letter said there "should" be an FBI investigation not that there "must" be one. I wouldn't necissarily take that as "I'm not coming Monday unless one is done".

GOP is obviously latching on to the request as a lifeline to push forward without a hearing. Maybe she comes, maybe she doesn't. I wouldn't wager one way or the other.

Edit: Also I find the Repulbican claim that the FBI couldn't and would not look into this kind of hilarious since that's what happened the last time. Yes they could if asked and some of these guys were in the Senate when that happened. Is it going to be requested this time...no way.

FBI does background checks all the time. Trump adding to his lie count.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The letter said there "should" be an FBI investigation not that there "must" be one. I wouldn't necissarily take that as "I'm not coming Monday unless one is done".

GOP is obviously latching on to the request as a lifeline to push forward without a hearing. Maybe she comes, maybe she doesn't. I wouldn't wager one way or the other.

Edit: Also I find the Repulbican claim that the FBI couldn't and would not look into this kind of hilarious since that's what happened the last time. Yes they could if asked and some of these guys were in the Senate when that happened. Is it going to be requested this time...no way.

If she wants to be taken seriously in time she needs to show up. The FBI may investigate but now we're making them look like a political tool at this point and that's serious business.

This really can't happen again. There should be a set in stone input period from the public before the appointment of candidates. Those who allege misconduct have until that time and those who apply will need to commit to being questioned by the FBI if the latter deems investigating appropriate.

This process has been random and bizarre for a hundred years or more too long. We need binding rules and no arbitrary hand waving.

 

[K1052]

If she wants to be taken seriously in time she needs to show up. The FBI may investigate but now we're making them look like a political tool at this point and that's serious business.

This really can't happen again. There should be a set in stone input period from the public before the appointment of candidates. Those who allege misconduct have until that time and those who apply will need to commit to being questioned by the FBI if the latter deems investigating appropriate.

This process has been random and bizarre for a hundred years or more too long. We need binding rules and no arbitrary hand waving.

Arguably there should also be a set timeline for all nominations to be acted upon by congress without artificially shortening or elongating the process.

Kill off lifetime appointments for any positions up to and including the Supreme Court. Maybe make it 10 year terms with the option for another term if renominated.

 

[HomerJS]

Arguably there should also be a set timeline for all nominations to be acted upon by congress without artificially shortening or elongating the process.

Kill off lifetime appointments for any positions up to and including the Supreme Court. Maybe make it 10 year terms with the option for another term if renominated.

Republicans started the process flawed by not making all documents available. There was information available when he worked for Bush that some random dude deemed "confidential" when it was unnecessary.

 

[deathBOB]

I would honestly be surprised if a hearing is held Monday and Kavanaugh isn’t withdrawn as the nominee.

A televised hearing with a bunch of male republican senators beating up on Ford as she describes what happened is not a good look for the GOP in front of a tough election.

There are other candidates, and I don’t think the public is particularly attached to Kavanaugh or any other nominee. Does anyone remember any real political consequences for Bush withdrawing Harriet Meyers? I don’t.