Christine Ford - The facts and their weight

[Sunsettommy]

she didn't know how she got to the party
she didn't know who's house it was
she doesn't recall what year it happened
she doesn't know how she got home

give me a better reason for why all this is true.

You don't know any of those things. Made up garbage simply because not every detail was in the letter.

BUT DR.LOVE OBIOUSLY DOES?

What a putz.

Nobody does you slobbering idiot - That is what investigations are for.

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

 

[jc456]

I believe Ford. The facts are pretty convincing and support her credibility. I am listing the facts, and scoring them for their probative value on a 1 - 5 scale.


Revealed the attack in 2012 - 5
There would be no reason for her to make up this story in 2012. She stated then that the two individuals involved had become prominent members of Washington society, and that is true for Kavanaugh and Judge.

Revealed Kavanaugh's name in 2012 - 2
That she revealed the name only to her husband drastically reduces the impact of this piece of information. We can't ignore the possibility that her husband is willing to lie to support her. But we also cannot discount his statements simply because he is her husband. If there were potential for some kind of tangible benefit for this couple to gain, I would score this a "1", but any possible benefit to be gained would be several steps removed, at best.

Anonymous July letter - 3
Anyone can submit an anonymous letter and say anything. In and of itself it doesn't mean much, and by itself it wouldn't doing much with. But what is significant here is that Ford is not, in any way, trying to launch a last minute torpedo to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation. She submitted an "FYI" letter to inform her Senator, but she didn't want to be in the spotlight. Feinstein's office probably handled this in a very partisan way, playing political games. But that is no reflection on Ford's credibility. Ford only came forward after the letter was leaked and made public.

Going into hiding - 3
In conjunction with the previous point, it is pretty clear that Ford is looking for 15 minutes of fame. To the contrary, she would rather stay out of the spotlight. She didn't have to step forward and reveal herself, and she doesn't like being in the spotlight, but she's done it anyway. What we're seeing is much more consistent with a sexual assault victim who is struggling for the strength to speak out, than a partisan who is making salacious lies. This doesn't speak directly to the veracity of her claims. But her reluctance to testify is consistent with the fact that she hadn't wanted to come forward in the first place, which supports her credibility.

Request for FBI, other investigations - 4
While not wanting to testify in front of the entire nation, she has said that she would want the FBI to investigate. This would be consistent with a sexual assault victim who longs for privacy. But perhaps more importantly, it would open her up to legal liability. And that fully neutralizes the suggestions by some that her reluctance to testify her way of trying to avoid perjury.

Classmate claims to have known about incident - 1
Contemporary knowledge of the incident would be a powerfully convincing fact. If what this classmate is saying is true, it's devastating and puts seals the deal. However, much more is needed before it can be afforded significant weight. As it stands now, this classmate could easily be lying and just trying to tip the scales for partisan reasons. This classmate suggests that the incident became general knowledge among much of the student body. So we should be able to expect there to be other classmates who would also remember hearing about the incident. If others come forward, this point could become strong enough to eliminate all doubt. Until then, it is a very weak piece of evidence. Especially because every indication from Ford thus far is that she kept the incident secret out of embarrassment.

Your analysis and ratings notwithstanding, it is utterly absurd to disqualify an otherwise outstanding person for an incident that happened decades ago before he had reached legal age and while he was drunk. If this is the worst thing he has very done, and there is nothing I have seen he has done anything else since then (no pattern of poor judgement and bad behavior) then he should be confirmed post haste.

"Your analysis and ratings notwithstanding, it is utterly absurd to disqualify an otherwise outstanding person for an incident that happened decades ago before he had reached legal age and while he was drunk"

You're SERIOUSLY trying to excuse sexual assault as no big deal? ANd using the "I was drunk" defense?

Are ya kidding?

This guy wants to sit on the bench of the highest court in the land FOR LIFE

why are you exploiting the woman?

 

[DrLove]

You don't know any of those things. Made up garbage simply because not every detail was in the letter.

BUT DR.LOVE OBIOUSLY DOES?

What a putz.

Nobody does you slobbering idiot - That is what investigations are for.

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

Fine - Now put them to work on MULTIPLE classmates who heard the rumors and put them on the witness stand.

 

[jc456]

BUT DR.LOVE OBIOUSLY DOES?

What a putz.

Nobody does you slobbering idiot - That is what investigations are for.

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

Fine - Now put them to work on MULTIPLE classmates who heard the rumors and put them on the witness stand.

why?

 

[Sunsettommy]

BUT DR.LOVE OBIOUSLY DOES?

What a putz.

Nobody does you slobbering idiot - That is what investigations are for.

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

Fine - Now put them to work on MULTIPLE classmates who heard the rumors and put them on the witness stand.

First of all those school rumors were made up and now RETRACTED! I knew this hours ago that Miranda backed out saying she never heard them.
Second, Ford herself stated that she told NO ONE until 2012, never even said it was Kavanaugh by name until a month ago.
Third, up to this time she has shown no indication that she has real evidence that Kavanaugh was there or he did it. It is at this time just an allegation, nothing more.
fourth, she has contradicted herself several times now on who was there, how many were there, doesn't know where the place is, date of the alleged incident...….

You are so far behind.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Nobody - they made it up and they're sticking to it.

Teenagers that go to drinking parties, typically drink.

You need to get out more.

"Typically" doesn't necessarily describe this young lady. Unless you were there with a breathalyzer, STFU

Actually "typical" does apply, she comes across as the typical dumbass liberal.

She had farah fawcet hair , look at her she was slutty as Rebecca De Mornay in risky business..

Why I continue to read your posts is a mystery. Guess that I enjoy your special brand of STOOOOPID!

Says the parrot..

 

[DrLove]

Teenagers that go to drinking parties, typically drink.

You need to get out more.

"Typically" doesn't necessarily describe this young lady. Unless you were there with a breathalyzer, STFU

Actually "typical" does apply, she comes across as the typical dumbass liberal.

She had farah fawcet hair , look at her she was slutty as Rebecca De Mornay in risky business..

Why I continue to read your posts is a mystery. Guess that I enjoy your special brand of STOOOOPID!

Says the parrot..

You can't even find a parrot Trumptardo?
THAT is a cockatiel - looks like mine!

 

[jc456]

"Typically" doesn't necessarily describe this young lady. Unless you were there with a breathalyzer, STFU

Actually "typical" does apply, she comes across as the typical dumbass liberal.

She had farah fawcet hair , look at her she was slutty as Rebecca De Mornay in risky business..

Why I continue to read your posts is a mystery. Guess that I enjoy your special brand of STOOOOPID!

Says the parrot..

You can't even find a parrot Trumptardo?
THAT is a cockatiel - looks like mine!

I don't see the normal cockatiel flare on the head. hmmm you sure?

 

[Darkwind]

she didn't know how she got to the party
she didn't know who's house it was
she doesn't recall what year it happened
she doesn't know how she got home

give me a better reason for why all this is true.

She's in her 50s, it's an incident that happened over 35 years ago, and you're asking for the immaterial facts. I bet she doesn't remember what she had for breakfast that morning, either. Do you even remember what you had for breakfast yesterday?

What?

Wow.

Every woman I know and every testimony I've ever read about a woman being assaulted has one thing in common.

The incident is seared into the memory. They recall every specific detail, usually right down to the pain of clothes burning across their skin as they are torn away.

If she was traumatized as she claims, she'd have vivid details of the incident, where it happened, even the cast of the sky on that day/night. Why do you think it is such a horrendous crime, to begin with?

I noticed a number of things which you left out of her life. Her rabid advocacy against Republicans. The scrubbing of her social media accounts.

One other telling disconnects with her story. She says she feared backlash, yet her entire life is filled with political activity without fear.

The woman is very vocal in her opinions and temperament. So, we are to just take her word for it that she was unwilling to come forward until now?

Sorry, but the weight of her credibility is quickly waining.

There were real opportunities for her to get her story out there, out of the public eye and before the eyes of the Senate without all this circus. But as usual, the Democrats not only mishandled this badly, they are yet again victimizing her and victimizing Kavanaugh.

The idiot Republicans had better use this against them for the mid-term. Nothing energizes the Republican base like Democrats playing games when the top reason for Trumps nomination was exactly this. To get Constitutionalists on the Supreme Court.

 

[Wyatt earp]

"Typically" doesn't necessarily describe this young lady. Unless you were there with a breathalyzer, STFU

Actually "typical" does apply, she comes across as the typical dumbass liberal.

She had farah fawcet hair , look at her she was slutty as Rebecca De Mornay in risky business..

Why I continue to read your posts is a mystery. Guess that I enjoy your special brand of STOOOOPID!

Says the parrot..

You can't even find a parrot Trumptardo?
THAT is a cockatiel - looks like mine!

Figures your a bird brain, why am I not surprised?



.

 

[DrLove]

Nobody does you slobbering idiot - That is what investigations are for.

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

Fine - Now put them to work on MULTIPLE classmates who heard the rumors and put them on the witness stand.

First of all those school rumors were made up and now RETRACTED! I knew this hours ago that Miranda backed out saying she never heard them.
Second, Ford herself stated that she told NO ONE until 2012, never even said it was Kavanaugh by name until a month ago.
Third, up to this time she has shown no indication that she has real evidence that Kavanaugh was there or he did it. It is at this time just an allegation, nothing more.
fourth, she has contradicted herself several times now on who was there, how many were there, doesn't know where the place is, date of the alleged incident...….

You are so far behind.

Citing Breitbart is NOT winning strategery - It makes you quite frankly, an IDIOT

 

[jc456]

she didn't know how she got to the party
she didn't know who's house it was
she doesn't recall what year it happened
she doesn't know how she got home

give me a better reason for why all this is true.

She's in her 50s, it's an incident that happened over 35 years ago, and you're asking for the immaterial facts. I bet she doesn't remember what she had for breakfast that morning, either. Do you even remember what you had for breakfast yesterday?

What?

Wow.

Every woman I know and every testimony I've ever read about a woman being assaulted has one thing in common.

The incident is seared into the memory. They recall every specific detail, usually right down to the pain of clothes burning across their skin as they are torn away.

If she was traumatized as she claims, she'd have vivid details of the incident, where it happened, even the cast of the sky on that day/night. Why do you think it is such a horrendous crime, to begin with?

I noticed a number of things which you left out of her life. Her rabid advocacy against Republicans. The scrubbing of her social media accounts.

One other telling disconnects with her story. She says she feared backlash, yet her entire life is filled with political activity without fear.

The woman is very vocal in her opinions and temperament. So, we are to just take her word for it that she was unwilling to come forward until now?

Sorry, but the weight of her credibility is quickly waining.

There were real opportunities for her to get her story out there, out of the public eye and before the eyes of the Senate without all this circus. But as usual, the Democrats not only mishandled this badly, they are yet again victimizing her and victimizing Kavanaugh.

The idiot Republicans had better use this against them for the mid-term. Nothing energizes the Republican base like Democrats playing games when the top reason for Trumps nomination was exactly this. To get Constitutionalists on the Supreme Court.

One other telling disconnect with her story. She says she feared backlash, yet her entire life is filled with political activity without fear.

this one is really very big. I agree, can't play the victim card when shes had her ass out in the public in sensitive places. that isn't consistent. not at all.

 

[iceberg]

she didn't know how she got to the party
she didn't know who's house it was
she doesn't recall what year it happened
she doesn't know how she got home

give me a better reason for why all this is true.

She's in her 50s, it's an incident that happened over 35 years ago, and you're asking for the immaterial facts. I bet she doesn't remember what she had for breakfast that morning, either. Do you even remember what you had for breakfast yesterday?

What?

Wow.

Every woman I know and every testimony I've ever read about a woman being assaulted has one thing in common.

The incident is seared into the memory. They recall every specific detail, usually right down to the pain of clothes burning across their skin as they are torn away.

If she was traumatized as she claims, she'd have vivid details of the incident, where it happened, even the cast of the sky on that day/night. Why do you think it is such a horrendous crime, to begin with?

I noticed a number of things which you left out of her life. Her rabid advocacy against Republicans. The scrubbing of her social media accounts.

One other telling disconnects with her story. She says she feared backlash, yet her entire life is filled with political activity without fear.

The woman is very vocal in her opinions and temperament. So, we are to just take her word for it that she was unwilling to come forward until now?

Sorry, but the weight of her credibility is quickly waining.

There were real opportunities for her to get her story out there, out of the public eye and before the eyes of the Senate without all this circus. But as usual, the Democrats not only mishandled this badly, they are yet again victimizing her and victimizing Kavanaugh.

The idiot Republicans had better use this against them for the mid-term. Nothing energizes the Republican base like Democrats playing games when the top reason for Trumps nomination was exactly this. To get Constitutionalists on the Supreme Court.

One other telling disconnect with her story. She says she feared backlash, yet her entire life is filled with political activity without fear.

this one is really very big. I agree, can't play the victim card when shes had her ass out in the public in sensitive places. that isn't consistent. not at all.

she's pretty active and vocal and from what i can tell isn't scared of much. that doesn't really seem like the "scarred for life" scenario that's being painted, no.

 

[imawhosure]

I believe Ford. The facts are pretty convincing and support her credibility. I am listing the facts, and scoring them for their probative value on a 1 - 5 scale.


Revealed the attack in 2012 - 5
There would be no reason for her to make up this story in 2012. She stated then that the two individuals involved had become prominent members of Washington society, and that is true for Kavanaugh and Judge.

Revealed Kavanaugh's name in 2012 - 2
That she revealed the name only to her husband drastically reduces the impact of this piece of information. We can't ignore the possibility that her husband is willing to lie to support her. But we also cannot discount his statements simply because he is her husband. If there were potential for some kind of tangible benefit for this couple to gain, I would score this a "1", but any possible benefit to be gained would be several steps removed, at best.

Anonymous July letter - 3
Anyone can submit an anonymous letter and say anything. In and of itself it doesn't mean much, and by itself it wouldn't doing much with. But what is significant here is that Ford is not, in any way, trying to launch a last minute torpedo to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation. She submitted an "FYI" letter to inform her Senator, but she didn't want to be in the spotlight. Feinstein's office probably handled this in a very partisan way, playing political games. But that is no reflection on Ford's credibility. Ford only came forward after the letter was leaked and made public.

Going into hiding - 3
In conjunction with the previous point, it is pretty clear that Ford is looking for 15 minutes of fame. To the contrary, she would rather stay out of the spotlight. She didn't have to step forward and reveal herself, and she doesn't like being in the spotlight, but she's done it anyway. What we're seeing is much more consistent with a sexual assault victim who is struggling for the strength to speak out, than a partisan who is making salacious lies. This doesn't speak directly to the veracity of her claims. But her reluctance to testify is consistent with the fact that she hadn't wanted to come forward in the first place, which supports her credibility.

Request for FBI, other investigations - 4
While not wanting to testify in front of the entire nation, she has said that she would want the FBI to investigate. This would be consistent with a sexual assault victim who longs for privacy. But perhaps more importantly, it would open her up to legal liability. And that fully neutralizes the suggestions by some that her reluctance to testify her way of trying to avoid perjury.

Classmate claims to have known about incident - 1
Contemporary knowledge of the incident would be a powerfully convincing fact. If what this classmate is saying is true, it's devastating and puts seals the deal. However, much more is needed before it can be afforded significant weight. As it stands now, this classmate could easily be lying and just trying to tip the scales for partisan reasons. This classmate suggests that the incident became general knowledge among much of the student body. So we should be able to expect there to be other classmates who would also remember hearing about the incident. If others come forward, this point could become strong enough to eliminate all doubt. Until then, it is a very weak piece of evidence. Especially because every indication from Ford thus far is that she kept the incident secret out of embarrassment.

You should probably read her yearbook and she should have gotten her story straight...more holes than swiss cheese

What Horse shit the Original Post is!

Hey Stormzilla, got a question for you---------->

QUESTION----------> What do sexual predators all have in common?

ANSWER------------> They have history from way back, and not so far back. Why look at the Liar of the Senate, Teddy Kennedy! Or how about Bill Clinstone! Let us not forget John Connyers. If you don't like that, look at Al Franken-) Want out of Washington, try Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Cosby!

You have 1...…….let me spell that for you...… O-N-E allegation from 35 years ago, and of course, you believe it; or say you do. Count me unsurprised, lolol.

If you actually believe your Leftist friends and you with your phony faux outrage are going to carry the day, I want to know what your smoking, and is it legal in the state you reside in!

And just to let you know----------> PERSONALLY, most of us would NOT mind if the accused withdrew his name! Why? Because Amy Barret would be next, and she has already had an FBI background check and would be ready to go! If you think HE woulda been bad for your politics, you would end up in the fetal position 22hrs a day if Amy Barret got the seat, lol.

Oh wait! Maybe she sexually harassed someone too, lol. In either case, your side is screwed, and you can take that check to the bank and cash it-)

 

[Sunsettommy]

No dumbshit. You throw the word “investigation” around like it means almost nothing. The investigation you speak of must be either 1) criminal. Which then requires probable cause. There is none on a federal crime. Or 2) as a background check for security purposes, which means the PRIVATE CITIZEN is required to approve. Without such approval it violates protected Constitutional rights.

Now quit speaking of things you have no clue about.

You’re a child in an adults world.

As a reminder (dumbshit) there was an FBI investigation of Anita Hill allegations. Your idiots (including Grassley & Hatch) agreed that it was the right thing to do and promptly abused her on the stand.

Then Joe Biden (to his shame) shut the whole thing down.

Grow the **** up and LEARN something.

The BUSH1 Administration requested the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims, which they produced in 3 days saying her claims are unfounded. The Democrats knew from the start that it was unfounded.

Fine - Now put them to work on MULTIPLE classmates who heard the rumors and put them on the witness stand.

First of all those school rumors were made up and now RETRACTED! I knew this hours ago that Miranda backed out saying she never heard them.
Second, Ford herself stated that she told NO ONE until 2012, never even said it was Kavanaugh by name until a month ago.
Third, up to this time she has shown no indication that she has real evidence that Kavanaugh was there or he did it. It is at this time just an allegation, nothing more.
fourth, she has contradicted herself several times now on who was there, how many were there, doesn't know where the place is, date of the alleged incident...….

You are so far behind.

Citing Breitbart is NOT winning strategery - It makes you quite frankly, an IDIOT

What you mean is that you didn't read the INTERNAL links to Miranda who made the statements, here it is for the lazy ass you are who ignores the fact that Ford never mention Kavanaugh by name until a month ago. Thus Miranda was LYING about it since Ford clearly stated she told NO one for 36 years.

Straight from NPR (a link from Breitbart article you didn't read)

Kavanaugh Accuser's Classmate: 'That It Happened Or Not, I Have No Idea'

"That it happened or not, I have no idea," Cristina King Miranda told NPR's Nina Totenberg. "I can't say that it did or didn't."

 

[jc456]

I believe Ford. The facts are pretty convincing and support her credibility. I am listing the facts, and scoring them for their probative value on a 1 - 5 scale.


Revealed the attack in 2012 - 5
There would be no reason for her to make up this story in 2012. She stated then that the two individuals involved had become prominent members of Washington society, and that is true for Kavanaugh and Judge.

Revealed Kavanaugh's name in 2012 - 2
That she revealed the name only to her husband drastically reduces the impact of this piece of information. We can't ignore the possibility that her husband is willing to lie to support her. But we also cannot discount his statements simply because he is her husband. If there were potential for some kind of tangible benefit for this couple to gain, I would score this a "1", but any possible benefit to be gained would be several steps removed, at best.

Anonymous July letter - 3
Anyone can submit an anonymous letter and say anything. In and of itself it doesn't mean much, and by itself it wouldn't doing much with. But what is significant here is that Ford is not, in any way, trying to launch a last minute torpedo to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation. She submitted an "FYI" letter to inform her Senator, but she didn't want to be in the spotlight. Feinstein's office probably handled this in a very partisan way, playing political games. But that is no reflection on Ford's credibility. Ford only came forward after the letter was leaked and made public.

Going into hiding - 3
In conjunction with the previous point, it is pretty clear that Ford is looking for 15 minutes of fame. To the contrary, she would rather stay out of the spotlight. She didn't have to step forward and reveal herself, and she doesn't like being in the spotlight, but she's done it anyway. What we're seeing is much more consistent with a sexual assault victim who is struggling for the strength to speak out, than a partisan who is making salacious lies. This doesn't speak directly to the veracity of her claims. But her reluctance to testify is consistent with the fact that she hadn't wanted to come forward in the first place, which supports her credibility.

Request for FBI, other investigations - 4
While not wanting to testify in front of the entire nation, she has said that she would want the FBI to investigate. This would be consistent with a sexual assault victim who longs for privacy. But perhaps more importantly, it would open her up to legal liability. And that fully neutralizes the suggestions by some that her reluctance to testify her way of trying to avoid perjury.

Classmate claims to have known about incident - 1
Contemporary knowledge of the incident would be a powerfully convincing fact. If what this classmate is saying is true, it's devastating and puts seals the deal. However, much more is needed before it can be afforded significant weight. As it stands now, this classmate could easily be lying and just trying to tip the scales for partisan reasons. This classmate suggests that the incident became general knowledge among much of the student body. So we should be able to expect there to be other classmates who would also remember hearing about the incident. If others come forward, this point could become strong enough to eliminate all doubt. Until then, it is a very weak piece of evidence. Especially because every indication from Ford thus far is that she kept the incident secret out of embarrassment.

You should probably read her yearbook and she should have gotten her story straight...more holes than swiss cheese

What Horse shit the Original Post is!

Hey Stormzilla, got a question for you---------->

QUESTION----------> What do sexual predators all have in common?

ANSWER------------> They have history from way back, and not so far back. Why look at the Liar of the Senate, Teddy Kennedy! Or how about Bill Clinstone! Let us not forget John Connyers. If you don't like that, look at Al Franken-) Want out of Washington, try Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Cosby!

You have 1...…….let me spell that for you...… O-N-E allegation from 35 years ago, and of course, you believe it; or say you do. Count me unsurprised, lolol.

If you actually believe your Leftist friends and you with your phony faux outrage are going to carry the day, I want to know what your smoking, and is it legal in the state you reside in!

And just to let you know----------> PERSONALLY, most of us would NOT mind if the accused withdrew his name! Why? Because Amy Barret would be next, and she has already had an FBI background check and would be ready to go! If you think HE woulda been bad for your politics, you would end up in the fetal position 22hrs a day if Amy Barret got the seat, lol.

Oh wait! Maybe she sexually harassed someone too, lol. In either case, your side is screwed, and you can take that check to the bank and cash it-)

or, why she doesn't believe the woman from ellison's accuser. OMG how can she not be outraged at that one. OMG

 

[OKTexas]

I believe Ford. The facts are pretty convincing and support her credibility. I am listing the facts, and scoring them for their probative value on a 1 - 5 scale.


Revealed the attack in 2012 - 5
There would be no reason for her to make up this story in 2012. She stated then that the two individuals involved had become prominent members of Washington society, and that is true for Kavanaugh and Judge.

Revealed Kavanaugh's name in 2012 - 2
That she revealed the name only to her husband drastically reduces the impact of this piece of information. We can't ignore the possibility that her husband is willing to lie to support her. But we also cannot discount his statements simply because he is her husband. If there were potential for some kind of tangible benefit for this couple to gain, I would score this a "1", but any possible benefit to be gained would be several steps removed, at best.

Anonymous July letter - 3
Anyone can submit an anonymous letter and say anything. In and of itself it doesn't mean much, and by itself it wouldn't doing much with. But what is significant here is that Ford is not, in any way, trying to launch a last minute torpedo to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation. She submitted an "FYI" letter to inform her Senator, but she didn't want to be in the spotlight. Feinstein's office probably handled this in a very partisan way, playing political games. But that is no reflection on Ford's credibility. Ford only came forward after the letter was leaked and made public.

Going into hiding - 3
In conjunction with the previous point, it is pretty clear that Ford is looking for 15 minutes of fame. To the contrary, she would rather stay out of the spotlight. She didn't have to step forward and reveal herself, and she doesn't like being in the spotlight, but she's done it anyway. What we're seeing is much more consistent with a sexual assault victim who is struggling for the strength to speak out, than a partisan who is making salacious lies. This doesn't speak directly to the veracity of her claims. But her reluctance to testify is consistent with the fact that she hadn't wanted to come forward in the first place, which supports her credibility.

Request for FBI, other investigations - 4
While not wanting to testify in front of the entire nation, she has said that she would want the FBI to investigate. This would be consistent with a sexual assault victim who longs for privacy. But perhaps more importantly, it would open her up to legal liability. And that fully neutralizes the suggestions by some that her reluctance to testify her way of trying to avoid perjury.

Classmate claims to have known about incident - 1
Contemporary knowledge of the incident would be a powerfully convincing fact. If what this classmate is saying is true, it's devastating and puts seals the deal. However, much more is needed before it can be afforded significant weight. As it stands now, this classmate could easily be lying and just trying to tip the scales for partisan reasons. This classmate suggests that the incident became general knowledge among much of the student body. So we should be able to expect there to be other classmates who would also remember hearing about the incident. If others come forward, this point could become strong enough to eliminate all doubt. Until then, it is a very weak piece of evidence. Especially because every indication from Ford thus far is that she kept the incident secret out of embarrassment.

Yeah, because 36 year old High School rumors are sooooooooo reliable. LMAO

.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

lol

Chris Cuomhole Doesn’t Get the Answer He Was Hoping For in Online Poll

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Your analysis and ratings notwithstanding, it is utterly absurd to disqualify an otherwise outstanding person for an incident that happened decades ago before he had reached legal age

That is a fair argument.

and while he was drunk.

That is not.

But the bigger problem I see at this point is one of honesty and integrity. Of course, the Democrats are screwing that up entirely and are once again highlighting their incredible talent for failing when victory is handed to them. There is already significant reason to believe that Kavanaugh has lied under oath during this confirmation process. Now, with these accusations coming forth, he is denying them. Given that the accusations are very credible, his denials appear to be more lies, which seems to put Kavanaugh in a position of being an untrustworthy liar. That is a disqualifying trait for a Supreme Court justice.

It’s not a lie if he doesn’t recall the incident. Given he was drunk and it happened decades ago......well how many among us can’t recall things we did while drunk 30 years ago.

 

[DrLove]

What you mean is that you didn't read the INTERNAL links to Miranda who made the statements, here it is for the lazy ass you are who ignores the fact that Ford never mention Kavanaugh by name until a month ago. Thus Miranda was LYING about it since Ford clearly stated she told NO one for 36 years.

Straight from NPR (a link from Breitbart article you didn't read)

Kavanaugh Accuser's Classmate: 'That It Happened Or Not, I Have No Idea'

"That it happened or not, I have no idea," Cristina King Miranda told NPR's Nina Totenberg. "I can't say that it did or didn't."

Yeah, so she is trying to get the media out of her ass. Who can blame her? So what - no FIRST HAND knowledge means that she wasn't there and didn't see it happen. She still suspects that it did. And she will most certainly testify if subpoenaed.

To all media, I will not be doing anymore interviews. No more circus. To clarify my post: I do not have first hand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine. That's it. I don't have more to say on the subject.

— Cristina King Miranda (@reinabori) September 19, 2018

Miranda said staff from the Senate Judiciary Committee had reached out to her, something she was not expecting. She said she will not go through with a committee interview if asked.

Miranda says she played soccer with Ford — whom she refers to as Chrissy — in high school and that she continues to support her. Miranda added that despite not knowing specifics of what went on at the party three decades ago, she remembers that there was a "buzz" that went around about the party where an alleged incident involving students from her school and Kavanaugh's took place.​

Let me repeat - Breitbart?