Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

[danielpalos]

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, could do more to engender more cost effective management opportunities for the private sector.

More motivated Labor will look for work, less motivated Labor won't. The employer benefits from a more motivated, ready reserve Labor force.

A horrible Boss who knows how to achieve Profit, really should able proclaim His or Her own Firm, His or Her rules.

Practice makes Perfect, could be, Firm policy.

Please pay attention to the subject of the thread.

would this still be a social dilemma, in That case?

it should be about That, not This.

No. You're way off topic and trying to highjack the thread. Don't do that.

just asking. it is a problem now; why is that, right wingers?

 

[Slade3200]

Really? Summer 1982 when she was 15... you didn’t get the memo?

Please provide your proof... Even her therapist was unable to ascertain this information... All she could narrow it to was a three year period.

I don’t have proof, I haven’t spoken to her or even heard her speak. I’ve read an article written by a reporter and a letter the accuser wrote to a congress woman. So there isn’t enough information to say for sure what she knows and doesn’t know. The article says she was 15 it was summer at the end of her sophomore year in 1982. That’s all I’ve seen so far. You all who try and discredit her for not knowing the year are full of shit with that talking point.

Your an idiot. I investigated crimes for many years and this woman hasn't a leg to stand on.

You keep repeating conjecture in the hopes that it will take hold and people will believe your bull shit.. My training and experience tell me this woman is a liar. Take your bull shit elsewhere..

Ok Mr Investigator. Let’s go off your conclusion that she is lying. Humor me and answer 3 simple questions.

1. If she was making up this accusation, why would she implicate Kav and his friend Judge and not just the guy she was going after? Adding the extra person only makes the lie tougher to make stick

She also accused Judge because Judge would be in the same boat as Kavanaugh, unable to defend himself given that Ford couldn't remember the year it happened or in which house it happened. Ford probably thought that by saying another person saw it she would be more believable. It apparently worked on some posters here because they believe that Judge was in fact involved and was lying to protect his friend.

Now look at yourself. You believe she is telling the truth because she named a “witness”. See how easy that works?

Thank you for actually answering the question you are the first one. Point of clarification. I don’t believe she is telling the truth or lying. I’ve said numerous times that I need more information. It will be much easier to determine after we hear them both testify.

In response to your answer I’d say that including the second boy just increases the odds that they could disprove the accusation. What if Judge took family vacations every summer? So Im not quite buying your logic but I’ll move on the question #2

2. Why would she voluntarily take a lie detector test? I realize they are not credible in Court and not always accurate so please save the cookie cutter response. I’m thinking through the scenario that she just made this thing up. Usually people don’t run to the polygraph when they are propagating a lie. So why do you think she did?

 

[Slade3200]

Summer of 1982 genius. Pay better attention

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

We need no more of your idiocy.

Yeah, that’s the line from the article. What’s your point?

That she can’t remember the year dingbat.

Spelled it out for you AGAIN. But you will make the same idiotic statement again, won’t you?

You mean the statement that you are being presumptive. Yes I’m makkng that claim cause it’s true

Here we go again:

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

That means she can't CONFIRM the year dork

Ask her under oath and you’ll get a real answer. You’re taking a word from an article that a reporter wrote. Hardly evidence that you know what’s going on.

 

[Tilly]

I don’t have proof, I haven’t spoken to her or even heard her speak. I’ve read an article written by a reporter and a letter the accuser wrote to a congress woman. So there isn’t enough information to say for sure what she knows and doesn’t know. The article says she was 15 it was summer at the end of her sophomore year in 1982. That’s all I’ve seen so far. You all who try and discredit her for not knowing the year are full of shit with that talking point.

Your an idiot. I investigated crimes for many years and this woman hasn't a leg to stand on.

You keep repeating conjecture in the hopes that it will take hold and people will believe your bull shit.. My training and experience tell me this woman is a liar. Take your bull shit elsewhere..

Ok Mr Investigator. Let’s go off your conclusion that she is lying. Humor me and answer 3 simple questions.

1. If she was making up this accusation, why would she implicate Kav and his friend Judge and not just the guy she was going after? Adding the extra person only makes the lie tougher to make stick

Funny how Mr Investigator runs for the hills once the questions get tough. What a joke

You keep demanding people speculate about her motives.
What’s the point? It isn’t necessary since she can provide absolutely no evidence to back up her allegations. You are the joke here!

At this point we are all speculating so why can’t you just answer the question? Give it your best speculation and show us how it makes sense

No, you are speculating and demanding others do the same.
We don’t need to play your game since she has absolutely NO EVIDENCE for her 38 year old allegations.

 

[Tilly]

We have moved pass the idea that a drunk high school kid may hsve tried to force himself on a high school girl.

The question has become whether Kavanaugh lied. And if he lied under oath, does he get prosecuted for it?

Wow, you sure are getting ahead of yourself. If she lied, is she going to be prosecuted? If not, why not?

Ford passed the line into slander a long time ago. The letter she wrote to Finestien is evidence of slander in writing. I'm betting this bimbo doesn't testify in an effort to keep from being sued and held civilly liable for slander.

So, Kavanaugh can prove he didn't do it?

If there isno proof, is everything legal?

He isn’t required to prove a negative. The onus is on the accuser and she has nothing.

 

[Pop23]

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

We need no more of your idiocy.

Yeah, that’s the line from the article. What’s your point?

That she can’t remember the year dingbat.

Spelled it out for you AGAIN. But you will make the same idiotic statement again, won’t you?

You mean the statement that you are being presumptive. Yes I’m makkng that claim cause it’s true

Here we go again:

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

That means she can't CONFIRM the year dork

Ask her under oath and you’ll get a real answer. You’re taking a word from an article that a reporter wrote. Hardly evidence that you know what’s going on.

LOL

 

[Ame®icano]

OK, what part of the story she can remember?

Ive repeated it like a broken record, if you don’t get it by now then you aren’t going to get it.

You repeated what you want to believe, not what actually happened.

What have I said that is false or controversial?

You repeated her statements that are false and controversial.

For example?

Didn't you said you repeated it like a broken record?

 

[Jackson]

She had decades to say something. Regardless if she was maligned or not, she threw the opportunity away being silent so long.

It is too easy to accuse a famous person of indecency when it is recent. When it i decades ago, I think she should not be believed. She gave up her right by thinking of her future first but now she jeopardizes a SC candidate of his future.

 

[Care4all]

Your an idiot. I investigated crimes for many years and this woman hasn't a leg to stand on.

You keep repeating conjecture in the hopes that it will take hold and people will believe your bull shit.. My training and experience tell me this woman is a liar. Take your bull shit elsewhere..

Ok Mr Investigator. Let’s go off your conclusion that she is lying. Humor me and answer 3 simple questions.

1. If she was making up this accusation, why would she implicate Kav and his friend Judge and not just the guy she was going after? Adding the extra person only makes the lie tougher to make stick

Funny how Mr Investigator runs for the hills once the questions get tough. What a joke

You keep demanding people speculate about her motives.
What’s the point? It isn’t necessary since she can provide absolutely no evidence to back up her allegations. You are the joke here!

At this point we are all speculating so why can’t you just answer the question? Give it your best speculation and show us how it makes sense

No, you are speculating and demanding others do the same.
We don’t need to play your game since she has absolutely NO EVIDENCE for her 38 year old allegations.

but,
are you not speculating yourself by automatically assuming she is not telling the truth??

 

[Tilly]

Realidiot:
‘Her proof? Her statement of events.’


You don’t know that an allegation that something happened isn’t PROOF that something happened?

Really?

 

[Tilly]

So you think she made this whole thing up? Planted the story in therapy 6 years ago and then trained on how to pass a polygraph just in case he got nominated to the Supreme Court and is now using it to try and stop him?

Anita Hillwas brought in at the last minute to lie and so was this *****. Its the MO of the Left. She can't discuss the particulars because it didn't happen.

If she was brought in last minute to lie then rationalize the plan for me. Explain the therapy notes from 6 years ago and explain why she decided to implicate two boys instead of just Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh is not named in the therapists notes and the couple have said they contain inaccuracies . The therapy notes are of no use to her whatsoever.

 

[Pop23]

Ok Mr Investigator. Let’s go off your conclusion that she is lying. Humor me and answer 3 simple questions.

1. If she was making up this accusation, why would she implicate Kav and his friend Judge and not just the guy she was going after? Adding the extra person only makes the lie tougher to make stick

Funny how Mr Investigator runs for the hills once the questions get tough. What a joke

You keep demanding people speculate about her motives.
What’s the point? It isn’t necessary since she can provide absolutely no evidence to back up her allegations. You are the joke here!

At this point we are all speculating so why can’t you just answer the question? Give it your best speculation and show us how it makes sense

No, you are speculating and demanding others do the same.
We don’t need to play your game since she has absolutely NO EVIDENCE for her 38 year old allegations.

but,
are you not speculating yourself by automatically assuming she is not telling the truth??

Again, it is HER duty to prove the incident happened. He is not obligated to provide ANYTHING.

If she can't, and at this point, she has not, it is perfectly acceptable to speculate.

 

[Pop23]

So you think she made this whole thing up? Planted the story in therapy 6 years ago and then trained on how to pass a polygraph just in case he got nominated to the Supreme Court and is now using it to try and stop him?

Anita Hillwas brought in at the last minute to lie and so was this *****. Its the MO of the Left. She can't discuss the particulars because it didn't happen.

If she was brought in last minute to lie then rationalize the plan for me. Explain the therapy notes from 6 years ago and explain why she decided to implicate two boys instead of just Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh is not named in the therapists notes and the couple have said they contain inaccuracies . The therapy notes are of no use to her whatsoever.

They were the only evidence she actually had, AND THEY DISPUTE THEM.

They have zero evidence.

 

[Tilly]

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

We need no more of your idiocy.

Yeah, that’s the line from the article. What’s your point?

That she can’t remember the year dingbat.

Spelled it out for you AGAIN. But you will make the same idiotic statement again, won’t you?

You mean the statement that you are being presumptive. Yes I’m makkng that claim cause it’s true

Here we go again:

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

That means she can't CONFIRM the year dork

Ask her under oath and you’ll get a real answer. You’re taking a word from an article that a reporter wrote. Hardly evidence that you know what’s going on.

If someone is a liar what makes you think being under oath will change that? If she’s already lying she’s likely to maintain that under oath rather than demonstrate to the world she’s a liar.

 

[Tilly]

Ok Mr Investigator. Let’s go off your conclusion that she is lying. Humor me and answer 3 simple questions.

1. If she was making up this accusation, why would she implicate Kav and his friend Judge and not just the guy she was going after? Adding the extra person only makes the lie tougher to make stick

Funny how Mr Investigator runs for the hills once the questions get tough. What a joke

You keep demanding people speculate about her motives.
What’s the point? It isn’t necessary since she can provide absolutely no evidence to back up her allegations. You are the joke here!

At this point we are all speculating so why can’t you just answer the question? Give it your best speculation and show us how it makes sense

No, you are speculating and demanding others do the same.
We don’t need to play your game since she has absolutely NO EVIDENCE for her 38 year old allegations.

but,
are you not speculating yourself by automatically assuming she is not telling the truth??

Nope, I am saying people who know they have absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support a serious allegation which is 38 years old, and who also know that it will be impossible to prove or disprove - but WILL potentially negatively affect someone’s career and family - should NOT be making such allegations.

 

[Care4all]

Ford will not bellowed to go after Kavanugh as he must be able to defend himself from her accusations. These bastards (Fords attorney's) are political whores as they violate US Jurisprudence with their fantasy of turning our judicial system on its head. The requests defy reason and 250 years of judicial precedent.

Then why was he preparing with white house lawyers and whitehouse ex-politicos from Fox news for his testimony on Monday? Why did he tweet he looked forward to providing his testimony on Monday, when it was already known she wouldn't be there? So, he has his statement, practiced and already prepared with the help of whitehouse counsel???

But I agree, it seems like he would be the one given the chance to speak last!

So I looked up what was considered fair and just in a court case and what happens in a Court case's Closing Arguments:

The prosecution goes first,

the defendant side goes next,

AND THEN

The Prosecution/Accuser has the last, final closing argument.

The reason for this is because the burden of proof is on the prosecution's/Accuser's shoulders to prove... is what it said.... or something of the sort... let me cut and paste it...

The prosecution goes first, followed by the defense and a rebuttal by the prosecution. Because the prosecution has the burden of proof, it gets the final word. After the closing arguments, the judge will give the jury its final instructions.

So if we were to follow something like that, it would be she goes first, he goes second, she goes last as a rebuttal.

NOT that this is a trial! Though I did just hear that Maryland has no statute of limitation.... I did not know that! Alabama was something like only 5 years at the time of Roy Moore!

 

[Care4all]

Yeah, that’s the line from the article. What’s your point?

That she can’t remember the year dingbat.

Spelled it out for you AGAIN. But you will make the same idiotic statement again, won’t you?

You mean the statement that you are being presumptive. Yes I’m makkng that claim cause it’s true

Here we go again:

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

That means she can't CONFIRM the year dork

Ask her under oath and you’ll get a real answer. You’re taking a word from an article that a reporter wrote. Hardly evidence that you know what’s going on.

If someone is a liar what makes you think being under oath will change that? If she’s already lying she’s likely to maintain that under oath rather than demonstrate to the world she’s a liar.

5 years in prison... is the difference, and being a felon.

 

[Pop23]

That she can’t remember the year dingbat.

Spelled it out for you AGAIN. But you will make the same idiotic statement again, won’t you?

You mean the statement that you are being presumptive. Yes I’m makkng that claim cause it’s true

Here we go again:

“Believed it to be the summer of 1982”

That means she can't CONFIRM the year dork

Ask her under oath and you’ll get a real answer. You’re taking a word from an article that a reporter wrote. Hardly evidence that you know what’s going on.

If someone is a liar what makes you think being under oath will change that? If she’s already lying she’s likely to maintain that under oath rather than demonstrate to the world she’s a liar.

5 years in prison... is the difference, and being a felon.

And you now see why she refuses to testify.

Thanks

 

[Pop23]

I think I see a movie sequel in Christina Fords future. If you've seen it, you will get this. If not, watch it!

The Informant! (2009) - IMDb

 

[Ame®icano]

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, could do more to engender more cost effective management opportunities for the private sector.

More motivated Labor will look for work, less motivated Labor won't. The employer benefits from a more motivated, ready reserve Labor force.

A horrible Boss who knows how to achieve Profit, really should able proclaim His or Her own Firm, His or Her rules.

Practice makes Perfect, could be, Firm policy.

What that has to do with Kavanaugh and his accuser?

Still load of crap, by the way.