Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

[Aba Incieni]

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.

Do you think the therapy notes are a lie or that something really happened to her when she was 15?

The notes don't agree with her current version.

So let me ask you. Are they a lie?

Why do you expect me to answer your questions when you avoid answering mine?!

I’ll do it anyways because I’m not scared of answering questions.

If there are inconsistencies between the therapy notes and her current story then she should be questioned about the inconsistencies.

That's not what I asked, Ms. Pretend Answer.

Are the notes a lie?

SHOW THEM, and what you believe was inconsistent.

Then we can answer our thoughts on it...

There are discrepancies about the number of people at the party. Answer it.

Thus far, those named have denied every one of her allegations.

 

[Care4all]

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

And you now see why she refuses to testify.

Thanks

she HAS NOT REFUSED TO TESTIFY.

She can do so, on Thursday or after.

Why are you saying she refused to testify?

She had until today at 10AM. Has she done so?

Her lawyer replied last night that she would testify but she could not make it on Monday....

Kavanaugh lives here, she lives across the entire country, needs time to prepare with family, newly gotten lawyer, work/career and security and travel arrangements... and the Senate needs to prepare for her security once she gets here.

Seems very reasonable to me...

And what is the RUSH for.... the Repubs in the Senate appear as assholes to me... there is no reason for them to be this way.... they already know, even if she is telling the truth, they are all going to vote lock step, and put Kavanaugh in to the Supreme Court, JUST LIKE they did with Clarence Thomas... nothing' changed in near 30 years....

Today airliners go really really fast. This is all bullshit.

Hope they vote monday with the allotted time made for her testimony.

Rush? DiFi had the information for SIX WEEKS!

Yes she did, and was asked to keep it confidential...
Someone, a democratic staffer-deep stater by trumpster standard, is presumed but not confirmed and known yet, to have done it... leaked her name.

They should be fired, whomever it was...!!!!

This is why Doctor Ford was thrown in to this public mess... it was not by her choice. The death threats on her and family, having to move out of her home, having to find a new home to live, having to hire a lawyer that knows senate hearing standards, having to hire security to protect her and family has all taken place since Monday....

HELLO? Anybody home?

Get real! Monday upcoming was a dead issue, before the word Monday was spoken...

But the Republicans on the committee KNEW this already Pop.... it was all a political play, with Fairness and REALLY wanting to get to the TRUTH, no where in sight!

you are acting like you are new to scummy politics and what these elected officials do...

 

[S.J.]

There are tons of possibilities to explain several scenarios, call them straws if you want, I don’t care.

I don't see you discussing the more likely scenario that she made the whole thing up.

That’s what I’m trying to discuss but y’all keep dodging the questions. Let’s assume she is making it up. Then try and make sense out of why she implicated two boys, the therapy notes from 6 years ago, the polygraph that she wanted to take and the FBI investigation that she is calling for. Let’s take a look at those actions and see how it fits into a meditated plan to push a false accusation

Gladly. First, she was probably assured that the accusation alone would be sufficient to convince Susan Collins to change her vote. Her lawyer stated she had witnesses and that she was eager to appear in front of Congress if necessary. The therapy notes and polygraph claims were thrown in to bolster her attack and figured it would be enough for Collins (maybe a few others) to flip her vote. Collins didn't flip, and now her bluff is being called and she can't back up all those claims. That's why they're coming up with all these demands they know will not be met. They are not planning to let her testify because she is lying, her lawyer is lying, and the Dems have painted themselves into a corner. Makes a lot more sense than your arguing over possible reasons for her inconsistencies. One only has to observe past behavior of the left to recognize this overused tactic of accusing their enemies of sexual misconduct without any substantiation. This is classic leftist character assassination.

 

[Foxfyre]

For Christ's sake, why would she wait for 40+ years to do anything about it?

This kind of nonsense is unbelievable, IMO.

I believe something probably happened at that party. Do I believe she has a clear recollection of exactly what happened or who was involved? No. Nor apparently does she.

But whatever happened short of rape or the most grievous premeditated aggravated assault and battery could not possibly be serious enough to condemn ANY party involved 36 years later. Most especially when all the participants were kids. Did boys (and girls) misbehave inappropriately when I was in school? Of course they did. Was I the target of some of that both from classmates and also some adults? Yes I was. Should those involved be forever condemned and forbidden any high office decades later? Of course not.

Can any one among us say that we have never behaved inappropriately or expressed an opinion or said something or believed something that would look really really bad on the front page of the newspapers or reported on the evening news? Especially when we were kids? Are we to be forever condemned for that? Give me a break.

The fact that the woman's story has changed suggests she is as fuzzy on the details as anybody.

The fact that the woman was lawyered up (with leftwing activist lawyers) and says she had already taken a polygraph before giving Feinstein the letter has political motivation written all over it.

The fact before giving her letter to Diane Feinstein--not Feinstein and Grassley but just the Democrat--and the fact that Feinstein had it months before Kavanaugh's hearing but sat on it until after the hearing and revealed that she had it days before the vote was to be taken has political motivation written all over it.

The fact that the letter was leaked to the media despite Feinstein's insistence that the woman wanted to remain anonymous has political motivation written all over it.

And the fact that Kavanaugh has already undergone nine FBI investigations for his various appointments to judgeships without anything like this turning up, and the fact that the Democrats are now wanting to delay the vote indefinitely, not withstanding that the woman is now dictating the terms of how the Judiciary must hold any hearing on the matter all has political motivation written all over it.

The Judiciary Committee delayed the vote for a week and gave Jones opportunity to testify on Monday but that wasn't acceptable, and she wouldn't specify what date would be acceptable, has political motivation written all over it. This has attempt to get Kavanaugh to withdraw and/or delay the confirmation vote until after the midterms written all over it.

The Senate should hold the vote on Wednesday and Kavanaugh should be confirmed and sent to the Supreme Court.

 

[Ame®icano]

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

she HAS NOT REFUSED TO TESTIFY.

She can do so, on Thursday or after.

Why are you saying she refused to testify?

She had until today at 10AM. Has she done so?

Her lawyer replied last night that she would testify but she could not make it on Monday....

Kavanaugh lives here, she lives across the entire country, needs time to prepare with family, newly gotten lawyer, work/career and security and travel arrangements... and the Senate needs to prepare for her security once she gets here.

Seems very reasonable to me...

And what is the RUSH for.... the Repubs in the Senate appear as assholes to me... there is no reason for them to be this way.... they already know, even if she is telling the truth, they are all going to vote lock step, and put Kavanaugh in to the Supreme Court, JUST LIKE they did with Clarence Thomas... nothing' changed in near 30 years....

"Need time to prepare".

Prepare for what? Either it happened, or not.

 

[Slade3200]

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.

Do you think the therapy notes are a lie or that something really happened to her when she was 15?

The notes don't agree with her current version.

So let me ask you. Are they a lie?

Why do you expect me to answer your questions when you avoid answering mine?!

I’ll do it anyways because I’m not scared of answering questions.

If there are inconsistencies between the therapy notes and her current story then she should be questioned about the inconsistencies.

That's not what I asked, Ms. Pretend Answer.

Are the notes a lie?

I have no way of knowing if they are a lie. They could be a number of things. She could be telling conflicting stories, the therapist could have been confused and recorded the wrong information. It could be an honest mistake, it could be a premeditated lie, which is why she should be questioned about it. You are still avoiding answering my questions while I continue to answer yours btw

 

[Tilly]

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.

Being questioned by a reporter and being questioned by the FBI or congress while under oath are two very different things. Do you not agree?

Not necessarily. Not to liars who want to protect themselves from prosecution.

 

[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.

Yes I’m speculating, we all are because none of us was there. I’m not demanding anything, if you don’t want to try and answer my questions then you don’t have too.

I know I don’t have to join you in wildly speculating, that’s why I’m not doing it. She has no evidence so all speculation is irrelevant.

 

[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.

Do you think the therapy notes are a lie or that something really happened to her when she was 15?

I have no idea and it’s irrelevant to this case since she did not name Kavanaugh.

 

[Aba Incieni]

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.

Do you think the therapy notes are a lie or that something really happened to her when she was 15?

The notes don't agree with her current version.

So let me ask you. Are they a lie?

Why do you expect me to answer your questions when you avoid answering mine?!

I’ll do it anyways because I’m not scared of answering questions.

If there are inconsistencies between the therapy notes and her current story then she should be questioned about the inconsistencies.

That's not what I asked, Ms. Pretend Answer.

Are the notes a lie?

I have no way of knowing if they are a lie. They could be a number of things. She could be telling conflicting stories, the therapist could have been confused and recorded the wrong information. It could be an honest mistake, it could be a premeditated lie, which is why she should be questioned about it. You are still avoiding answering my questions while I continue to answer yours btw

You asked the question. The notes diverge from her current version of the story. Are the notes lies?

It's your question.

 

[Tilly]

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.

There is literally no risk of that happening since she can’t prove her allegation and neither can it be disproved.

Sure it can, it would be Kavanaugh sworn testimony, and his Friend Judge's testimony.... two of them, swearing on oath it is not true, along with her changing her story with multiple questioning, along with any evidence she was out to get him since high school, or mistaken identity thingy, any of those combined, especially if she slips up, and tells different versions kind of thing....

This is why the questioning should really be done by the expert interrogator investigators at the FBI.... they are trained to spot lies and know how to work them out of the witness!!!

No. It’s not the FBIs job to investigate the activities of minors.

 

[Tilly]

Since Maryland changed their laws from 5 to 10 year statute of limitations on sexual assault type crimes, they must believe even if 40 years ago, it is possible to gather enough facts, to have a trial, right???

Changes to these laws are not applied retrospectively.

 

[Slade3200]

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.

Yes I’m speculating, we all are because none of us was there. I’m not demanding anything, if you don’t want to try and answer my questions then you don’t have too.

I know I don’t have to join you in wildly speculating, that’s why I’m not doing it. She has no evidence so all speculation is irrelevant.

If your kid comes to you and says that a grown man was touching her. Do you ask for evidence and if she doesn’t have any you dismiss it or do you explore the details of her story, read her body language, question the accuser and then make a judgement?

 

[Slade3200]

Do you think the therapy notes are a lie or that something really happened to her when she was 15?

The notes don't agree with her current version.

So let me ask you. Are they a lie?

Why do you expect me to answer your questions when you avoid answering mine?!

I’ll do it anyways because I’m not scared of answering questions.

If there are inconsistencies between the therapy notes and her current story then she should be questioned about the inconsistencies.

That's not what I asked, Ms. Pretend Answer.

Are the notes a lie?

I have no way of knowing if they are a lie. They could be a number of things. She could be telling conflicting stories, the therapist could have been confused and recorded the wrong information. It could be an honest mistake, it could be a premeditated lie, which is why she should be questioned about it. You are still avoiding answering my questions while I continue to answer yours btw

You asked the question. The notes diverge from her current version of the story. Are the notes lies?

It's your question.

That’s not my question that’s your question and I answered it. You must not be understanding my questions, although I don’t think I could have been anymore clear. You should work on that, makes you come off as insincere and manipulative.

 

[Slade3200]

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.

There is literally no risk of that happening since she can’t prove her allegation and neither can it be disproved.

Sure it can, it would be Kavanaugh sworn testimony, and his Friend Judge's testimony.... two of them, swearing on oath it is not true, along with her changing her story with multiple questioning, along with any evidence she was out to get him since high school, or mistaken identity thingy, any of those combined, especially if she slips up, and tells different versions kind of thing....

This is why the questioning should really be done by the expert interrogator investigators at the FBI.... they are trained to spot lies and know how to work them out of the witness!!!

No. It’s not the FBIs job to investigate the activities of minors.

The FBI does background checks on Supreme Court nominees. This is just part of that. Why are you so quick to dismiss it?

 

[Tilly]

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.

Yes I’m speculating, we all are because none of us was there. I’m not demanding anything, if you don’t want to try and answer my questions then you don’t have too.

I know I don’t have to join you in wildly speculating, that’s why I’m not doing it. She has no evidence so all speculation is irrelevant.

If your kid comes to you and says that a grown man was touching her. Do you ask for evidence and if she doesn’t have any you dismiss it or do you explore the details of her story, read her body language, question the accuser and then make a judgement?

What is it that you don’t get about ‘I don’t know where it happened, I don’t know when it happened, I don’t know how I got there, I don’t know how I got home, I was drunk, oh....and I reported the event to NO ONE?

 

[Slade3200]

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.

Yes I’m speculating, we all are because none of us was there. I’m not demanding anything, if you don’t want to try and answer my questions then you don’t have too.

I know I don’t have to join you in wildly speculating, that’s why I’m not doing it. She has no evidence so all speculation is irrelevant.

If your kid comes to you and says that a grown man was touching her. Do you ask for evidence and if she doesn’t have any you dismiss it or do you explore the details of her story, read her body language, question the accuser and then make a judgement?

What is it that you don’t get about ‘I don’t know where it happened, I don’t know when it happened, I don’t know how I got there, I don’t know how I got home, I was drunk, oh....and I reported the event to NO ONE?

What I do get about that is she never said half those things. Nice try though.

 

[Tilly]

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.

There is literally no risk of that happening since she can’t prove her allegation and neither can it be disproved.

Sure it can, it would be Kavanaugh sworn testimony, and his Friend Judge's testimony.... two of them, swearing on oath it is not true, along with her changing her story with multiple questioning, along with any evidence she was out to get him since high school, or mistaken identity thingy, any of those combined, especially if she slips up, and tells different versions kind of thing....

This is why the questioning should really be done by the expert interrogator investigators at the FBI.... they are trained to spot lies and know how to work them out of the witness!!!

No. It’s not the FBIs job to investigate the activities of minors.

The FBI does background checks on Supreme Court nominees. This is just part of that. Why are you so quick to dismiss it?

They’ve done background checks - at least 6.

 

[Aba Incieni]

The notes don't agree with her current version.

So let me ask you. Are they a lie?

Why do you expect me to answer your questions when you avoid answering mine?!

I’ll do it anyways because I’m not scared of answering questions.

If there are inconsistencies between the therapy notes and her current story then she should be questioned about the inconsistencies.

That's not what I asked, Ms. Pretend Answer.

Are the notes a lie?

I have no way of knowing if they are a lie. They could be a number of things. She could be telling conflicting stories, the therapist could have been confused and recorded the wrong information. It could be an honest mistake, it could be a premeditated lie, which is why she should be questioned about it. You are still avoiding answering my questions while I continue to answer yours btw

You asked the question. The notes diverge from her current version of the story. Are the notes lies?

It's your question.

That’s not my question that’s your question and I answered it. You must not be understanding my questions, although I don’t think I could have been anymore clear. You should work on that, makes you come off as insincere and manipulative.

Post #851 gives you the lie.

 

[Care4all]

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.

There is literally no risk of that happening since she can’t prove her allegation and neither can it be disproved.

Sure it can, it would be Kavanaugh sworn testimony, and his Friend Judge's testimony.... two of them, swearing on oath it is not true, along with her changing her story with multiple questioning, along with any evidence she was out to get him since high school, or mistaken identity thingy, any of those combined, especially if she slips up, and tells different versions kind of thing....

This is why the questioning should really be done by the expert interrogator investigators at the FBI.... they are trained to spot lies and know how to work them out of the witness!!!

No. It’s not the FBIs job to investigate the activities of minors.

The FBI does background checks on Supreme Court nominees. This is just part of that. Why are you so quick to dismiss it?

And the FBI does background investigations on every single person in our government that needs a security clearance, at any level....

It is the investigative arm, of the entire Federal government... the I- in FBI.... they are investigators, it is their job.