How far back are we going to go to disqualify people from public office for sexual harrassment?

[debbiedowner]

 

[playtime]

she has 2 people that can back her up as far as her account & a lie detector test saying she was truthful. brett only has his word. you would think a buddy would help him out....

No, one of them totally contradicted what Blasey said:

Woman claimed in now-deleted tweet to have gone to school with Christine Blasey Ford and said the ‘incident was spoken about for days’ in school

"In a now-deleted tweet, a woman named Cristina King Miranda, responding to actress Julia Louis-Dreyfus regarding the letter circulated by alumnae of the Holton Arms school in Maryland, says she remembers Christine Blasey Ford, “knew both Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge,” and that the “incident was spoken about for days afterwords [sic] in school”:

Screenshot: "

OOoops!!!

i am talking about her therapist & her husband.

oopsie.

You are going to ignore the lies surrounding the accusations. Blasey.. She is NUTS for insisting the FBI investigate it, when that idea blew up on Anita Hill's face, when they said after 3 days that her claims were UNFOUNDED.

They are deliberately STALLING hoping to avoid the next Monday testimony where she will be destroyed over her inconsistent claims.

lol... the FBI can very well prove her nuts.... not until president pussy grabber gives the OK.

The FBI has stated they will NOT investigate Kavanaugh because it is not a federal crime and exceeds the statute of limitations.

Breaking: FBI Will Not Investigate Christine Ford 36-Year-Old ever-Changing Allegations of Abuse

so no actual FBI official on camera saying it. & no google search for it turns up nothing either. the FBI can't actually do anything unless trump says so. & he won't.

 

[Natural Citizen]

And you are the first conservative on this board to join me in this assessment.
I got crucified pre election for constantly pointing this out.

One thing I have noticed about this board is your values, no matter which side, are secondary to group think.

Thank You. At least he's not Hillary, though. I'll take him over her any day.

 

[Sunsettommy]

No, one of them totally contradicted what Blasey said:

Woman claimed in now-deleted tweet to have gone to school with Christine Blasey Ford and said the ‘incident was spoken about for days’ in school

"In a now-deleted tweet, a woman named Cristina King Miranda, responding to actress Julia Louis-Dreyfus regarding the letter circulated by alumnae of the Holton Arms school in Maryland, says she remembers Christine Blasey Ford, “knew both Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge,” and that the “incident was spoken about for days afterwords [sic] in school”:

Screenshot: "

OOoops!!!

i am talking about her therapist & her husband.

oopsie.

You are going to ignore the lies surrounding the accusations. Blasey.. She is NUTS for insisting the FBI investigate it, when that idea blew up on Anita Hill's face, when they said after 3 days that her claims were UNFOUNDED.

They are deliberately STALLING hoping to avoid the next Monday testimony where she will be destroyed over her inconsistent claims.

lol... the FBI can very well prove her nuts.... not until president pussy grabber gives the OK.

The FBI has stated they will NOT investigate Kavanaugh because it is not a federal crime and exceeds the statute of limitations.

Breaking: FBI Will Not Investigate Christine Ford 36-Year-Old ever-Changing Allegations of Abuse

so no actual FBI official on camera saying it. & no google search for it turns up nothing either. the FBI can't actually do anything unless trump says so. & he won't.

You are indeed out of it since the FBI doesn't bother with such claims in the first place, surely you can't be that stupid?

Meanwhile Ford who appears to be trying hard to avoid Mondays testimony for silly reasons, despite that Kavanaugh immediately says YES, I will testify under oath.

BOOM: Chairman Grassley Gives Kavanaugh Accuser Bold Ultimatum

"During a radio interview Tuesday on “The Hugh Hewitt Show,” Grassley said he has sent numerous requests to Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Kavanaugh, to appear before the Senate on Monday to testify about what she claims happened to her nearly four decades ago.

Grassley scheduled a hearing for Monday and has invited both Kavanaugh and his legal team as well as Ford and her representatives to testify before Congress and lawmakers about the alleged incident in the early 1980s.

Kavanaugh has accepted the invitation and said he is anxious to answer questions and clear his name. Ford and her legal team have yet to respond to Grassley’s numerous requests to testify.

Grassley made it clear on Tuesday that if Ford’s team does not respond soon, the hearing scheduled for Monday is off, and the Committee will move forward with Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote next Thursday.

“We have reached out to her in the last 36 hours three or four times by email and we have not heard from them, and it kind of raises the question, do they want to come to the public hearing or not?”

When asked whether there would be a hearing if Ford did not agree to appear, Grassley said there was no reason to if she doesn’t respond.

“What would be the purpose of the hearing if Dr. Ford doesn’t want to respond?” Grassley added."

Just the PREVIOUS day Fords Lawyer said she is willing to testify, WITHOUT any mention of the FBI in the interview.

Ford and her Lawyer seems to be dragging their feet...…………………, what in the HELL FOR?

 

[dcbl]

she has 2 people that can back her up as far as her account & a lie detector test saying she was truthful. brett only has his word. you would think a buddy would help him out....

No no no, she has a lie detector test saying that the reported statement is correct, as in, in line with the letter to fienstien. With lie detector tests, they’ll ask the same question in a few different ways, as well as the control questions. The question posed is a sneaky little lawyer trick. I think it’s telling that that was the only question offered to the public, or if that was the only question operator asked her on the subject.

And she has one person backing up her account, that would be her husband, who got it second hand from her. And the other (who is also a second hand source) contradicts her account, with notes from the time she heard this second hand account (I think the therapy session was in 2012), vs the husbands memory of the session.

That’s some murky water there. Especially considering that she is not offering a date of the event, or the location of the event. With those two items one could at least attempt to verify/corroborate the story, (or in kavanaughs case) try to vindicate himself on the matter. Which would still be difficult because it was allegedly 36 years ago.

the FBI can look into it. trump says no. why?

The FBI already said they couldn’t. A. You can’t investigate something you don’t have a date, or time, specific location, any wittnesses present during the time, that was also 36 years ago. B. It’s not even an FBI matter, it’s a state matter.

the FBI did not say anything. they are the fucking FBI... they can't investigate? lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

how many times have they already investigated his background?

at least 6

Nothing untoward was ever even suggested

Now we learn that he may have tried to play grab ass when he was 17 so the sky screamers are happy to ruin his life

Telling

 

[danielpalos]

View attachment 217192

17 is absurd in my opinion. How bout 4?

If Only,

we could find nice girls who are willing to be friends,

in modern times.

 

[dcbl]

he committed pergury on unrelated matters during his interview... so there is that.

That was alleged and proven to be untrue

You really aren't very good at this

 

[bodecea]

Sexual Assault is always funny.

 

[dcbl]

they are the fucking FBI... they can't investigate?

Sure they can, but there has to be a crime for that

People don’t find the timing of all this suspicious?

Reasonable people do

This hurts the chances of a blue wave, the suburban women dems want to influence with this have husbands, sons, fathers and brothers

Noone wants a real sexual preditors to go unpunished, but noone wants to allow a vindictive woman with a clear agenda to ruin lives either

This is blowing up in their faces

 

[dcbl]

he won't.

Of course not, he's busy planning the re-education CAMPS

 

[dcbl]

Sexual Assault is always funny.

only when it's a white boy in prison, right?

 

[Erinwltr]

Next it will apply to parents and ancestors.

A race car driver actually lost a sponsor temporarily over something his father had said when he wasn't even born. This is freaking nuts.

NASCAR Xfinity driver Conor Daly, 26, loses his sponsorship after his father admitted to using the N-word in a 1980s radio interview before his son was even born

• Lilly Diabetes pulled its sponsorship of 26-year-old driver Conor Daly on Friday
• Company said it was in response to the racially insensitive remark made by his father Derek Daly during an interview in the 1980s
• Derek, who is a former driver, was fired from his job as a racing analyst after it resurfaced that he had said the N-word during the interview
• Conor will make his NASCAR debut at the rural Wisconsin road course on Saturday with Roush Fenway Racing
  
  NASCAR driver Conor Daly loses sponsorship over father's racial slur | Daily Mail Online

Are you a truncated version of Politichic?

 

[Sunsettommy]

The San Francisco Chronicle a left leaning newspaper is mad at Senator Feinstein!

San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Board Pans Feinstein’s Handling Of Kavanaugh Accusation

The Washington Free Beacon
BY: David Rutz
September 17, 2018 5:08 pm

Excerpt:

The San Francisco Chronicle editorial board took Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) to task for her handling of a sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, saying she took the "worst possible course."

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein's treatment of a more than 3-decade-old sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was unfair all around," the board wrote on Sunday. "It was unfair to Kavanaugh, unfair to his accuser, and unfair to Feinstein's colleagues—Democrats and Republicans alike—on the Senate Judiciary Committee."

"Feinstein, a California Democrat, took the worst possible course by waiting until almost a week after Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing was completed to ominously announce that she had turned over ‘information from an individual' about Kavanaugh to the FBI, and adding that she would be honoring the woman's ‘strongly requested' confidentiality," the editorial continued.

California professor Christine Blasey Ford wrote Feinstein in July that Kavanaugh drunkenly attacked and groped her when they were teenagers at a house party in Maryland. She requested to remain anonymous.

Feinstein did nothing with the information until after Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing concluded, when she released a vague statement last week about having "received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court" and that she had referred the matter to authorities.

The sordid details of the story quickly leaked out, and Ford came forward to reveal herself as the accuser, saying she feared her story would get twisted. Kavanaugh has flatly denied the accusation, as has a friend, Mark Judge, who Ford said witnessed the assault.

Feinstein did a "disservice to her Judiciary Committee colleagues" by concealing the charge she received in July, the Chronicle wrote.

LINK

 

[dcbl]

 

[JoeB131]

17 is absurd in my opinion. How bout 4?

We throw black kids in jail for stuff they do at 17.

A lot of states try them as adults and their records follow them around their whole lives.

so why does Kavanaugh get a pass because he is white and privileged.

But here's the thing... I would have no problem with Kavanaugh if he said, "You know what, I was drunk, 17 and stupid and did a stupid thing at a party and I apologize to Dr. Ford for any pain I caused her."

That's not what he's doing.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The Ford/Katz nonsense is entering the twilight zone.....

The Goal is Delay: Kavanaugh Accuser Demands FBI Investigation Prior to Testimony….

 

[Auld Phart]

17 is absurd in my opinion. How bout 4?

We throw black kids in jail for stuff they do at 17.

A lot of states try them as adults and their records follow them around their whole lives.

so why does Kavanaugh get a pass because he is white and privileged.

But here's the thing... I would have no problem with Kavanaugh if he said, "You know what, I was drunk, 17 and stupid and did a stupid thing at a party and I apologize to Dr. Ford for any pain I caused her."

That's not what he's doing.

"You know what, I was drunk, 17 and stupid and did a stupid thing at a party and I apologize to Dr. Ford for any pain I caused her."

Why would he admit to that, if he honestly doesn't believe it happened?

 

[Pop23]

Sexual Assault is always funny.

I don’t doubt for a moment that you think it is.

You are the creepiest dyke I know.

 

[Pop23]

17 is absurd in my opinion. How bout 4?

We throw black kids in jail for stuff they do at 17.

A lot of states try them as adults and their records follow them around their whole lives.

so why does Kavanaugh get a pass because he is white and privileged.

But here's the thing... I would have no problem with Kavanaugh if he said, "You know what, I was drunk, 17 and stupid and did a stupid thing at a party and I apologize to Dr. Ford for any pain I caused her."

That's not what he's doing.

Not everything is related to race Joe.

You are kind of looking creepy by always trying to.

 

[sakinago]

It sure isn't! But can you PROVE ANYTHING? If you can't, you are taking on persons word over the other, and that is DISCRIMINATION!

she has 2 people that can back her up as far as her account & a lie detector test saying she was truthful. brett only has his word. you would think a buddy would help him out....

No no no, she has a lie detector test saying that the reported statement is correct, as in, in line with the letter to fienstien. With lie detector tests, they’ll ask the same question in a few different ways, as well as the control questions. The question posed is a sneaky little lawyer trick. I think it’s telling that that was the only question offered to the public, or if that was the only question operator asked her on the subject.

And she has one person backing up her account, that would be her husband, who got it second hand from her. And the other (who is also a second hand source) contradicts her account, with notes from the time she heard this second hand account (I think the therapy session was in 2012), vs the husbands memory of the session.

That’s some murky water there. Especially considering that she is not offering a date of the event, or the location of the event. With those two items one could at least attempt to verify/corroborate the story, (or in kavanaughs case) try to vindicate himself on the matter. Which would still be difficult because it was allegedly 36 years ago.

the FBI can look into it. trump says no. why?

The FBI already said they couldn’t. A. You can’t investigate something you don’t have a date, or time, specific location, any wittnesses present during the time, that was also 36 years ago. B. It’s not even an FBI matter, it’s a state matter.

the FBI did not say anything. they are the fucking FBI... they can't investigate? lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This isn’t a tv show, the FBI mandate only covers a very select type of crimes, or more commonly, crimes that cross state boarders. So, if kavanaugh threw her in a car, drove her to Georgia, then groped her and tried to take off her shirt, maybe they could. The other problem with that, depending on the specific states law, this would probably be classified as a misdomeanor, where the statute of limitations are only a year.

Again the huge glaring problem here is we have no specific date, no specific time, no specific location, no other witnesses to coroberate even minor things like these two (kavanaugh and Ford) were seen at the same party at the same time. This does not allow for anyone to corroborate anything, does not give kavanaugh or any chance to definitively say he wasn’t there that night, etc. No alibis, no confirmations. No one was even told second hand about the event until 30 years after, and the only evidence of this are notes from a therapy session stating that the assault came from 4 boys, not 2. Now the husband says the therapist is mistaken, but that would be relying on the husbands 6 year old memory vs the therapists notes from that moment. This is basically univestigatable by the FBI or whoever.