Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

[Slade3200]

The FBI has already done several background checks on Kavanaugh. There’s no reason to do another one just because of a fabricated story where named “witnesses” have already denied the story is true or say they have no recollection of the event described.

Well there is a reason for the FBI to investigate because this story has delayed a SCOTUS nomination and consumed the news media for over a week. I can’t think of many issues that have been this controversial and despite your confidence there is no way for you to know that it is a fabricated story. So let’s vet it out make a call on what we believe and then move forward

'How many times do you need to IGNORE what the FBI said about it?

There is NOTHING to investigate as shown in my comment YOU and Billo-really have ignored which is just a few comments upthread.

ALL four of the named people deny they were there or that it didn't happen to them, even her long time friend contradicts her claim.

LINK from CNN

STOP EVADING IT!

I’m beginning to think Slade has learning difficulties and can’t google or watch the news to keep up with a story he is apparently very interested in.
And how many times must one keep reposting the same info for the leftards to (willfully) ignore?

I was traveling this weekend and not keeping up with political news. Read an article on fake news cnn saying that none of Ford’s witnesses can account for the party. Not sure if I’m supposed to believe cnn but if that’s true then it’s not looking good for Ford.

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

 

[Slade3200]

Well there is a reason for the FBI to investigate because this story has delayed a SCOTUS nomination and consumed the news media for over a week. I can’t think of many issues that have been this controversial and despite your confidence there is no way for you to know that it is a fabricated story. So let’s vet it out make a call on what we believe and then move forward

'How many times do you need to IGNORE what the FBI said about it?

There is NOTHING to investigate as shown in my comment YOU and Billo-really have ignored which is just a few comments upthread.

ALL four of the named people deny they were there or that it didn't happen to them, even her long time friend contradicts her claim.

LINK from CNN

STOP EVADING IT!

I’m beginning to think Slade has learning difficulties and can’t google or watch the news to keep up with a story he is apparently very interested in.
And how many times must one keep reposting the same info for the leftards to (willfully) ignore?

I was traveling this weekend and not keeping up with political news. Read an article on fake news cnn saying that none of Ford’s witnesses can account for the party. Not sure if I’m supposed to believe cnn but if that’s true then it’s not looking good for Ford.

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

 

[Billo_Really]

Non-partisan? Nah.

You're taking her story at face value without any corroboration at all. You assume for no reason that she's telling the truth because you don't think anyone would put themselves through something like this, then claim to be mystified that partisans would do exactly this kind of thing, thinking they were making a noble sacrifice for the good of the Party, or some such.

You believe her because you WANT to believe her, which blinds you to the holes in her story.

That's partisanship.

I don't have any reason not to believe her. And my position is not based on her alone. When you look at Kavanaugh's past judicial decisions, this dick hates women.

 

[The Purge]

Breaking NEWS:In the original Letter to FiensteinThe Font size is different!

twitter ^ | 09/23/2018 | paul sperry
BREAKING: In the original unredacted letter Feinstein finally gave to Grassley, the size of the font of first line of the second paragraph ("Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during High School in the early 1980's") is strangely larger than the rest of the text

 

[The Purge]

Four Reasons the New Accusations Against Kavanaugh Are Weaker Than Ford'sl

The New Yorker published a story written by Ronan Farrow and Jane Meyer proving that theory correct. This story centers on Deborah Ramirez. ....udge Kavanaugh has already released a statement denying the allegation. “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name — and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime — against these last-minute allegations.”

1. Ramirez admits gaps in her memory and wasn’t certain it was Kavanaugh

2. The New Yorker tried to find eyewitnesses... and failed

3. Others alleged to have been involved deny it happened

(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...

 

[Tilly]

'How many times do you need to IGNORE what the FBI said about it?

There is NOTHING to investigate as shown in my comment YOU and Billo-really have ignored which is just a few comments upthread.

ALL four of the named people deny they were there or that it didn't happen to them, even her long time friend contradicts her claim.

LINK from CNN

STOP EVADING IT!

I’m beginning to think Slade has learning difficulties and can’t google or watch the news to keep up with a story he is apparently very interested in.
And how many times must one keep reposting the same info for the leftards to (willfully) ignore?

I was traveling this weekend and not keeping up with political news. Read an article on fake news cnn saying that none of Ford’s witnesses can account for the party. Not sure if I’m supposed to believe cnn but if that’s true then it’s not looking good for Ford.

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

 

[The Purge]

Stop This Idiocy And Confirm Him
Townhall.com ^ | September 24, 2024 | Kurt Schlichter

As I write this, the “I really, really wanna testify, but…” goalpost has moved west right past my house and out over the Pacific Ocean. You get the distinct impression that Christine Ford’s handlers are making it up as they go along – “She can’t testify on Monday because, I dunno, she’s afraid of airplanes. Yeah, that’s a thing now.”

The GOP is, as usual, afraid to be seen as insufficiently submissive. We have Chuck Grassley announcing, by tweets that sound like they were composed by a twelve-year-old texting her girlfriends after breaking into mom’s cooking sherry, that he’s ready to roll over yet again. The only way this could get worse is if the crusty Iowan discovered emojis:

“Sorry Brett gotta postpone ur vote until 2021 cuz reasons [Sad Face] [Blue Wave] [Poop].”

No. Hold the vote, confirm Kavanaugh, and then let him set about making the libs sorry they ever pulled this stunt.

I am not alone in my disgust and desire to fight this appalling atrocity. There is a weird disconnect between the elite and normal Americans on the Kavanaugh smear issue and so many others, as I chronicle in my book Militant Normals: How Regular Americans Are Rebelling Against the Elite to Reclaim Our Democracy, which drops next week (Pre-order it right this second so all 288-pages of the kind of liberal and Fredocon abuse you enjoy here at Townhall, but with more swears, will be delivered to you fresh from the furnace on October 2). Within the elite bubble, the Republican gimps are carefully trying to pretend that they should respect this bizarre and uncorroborated tale of convenience by a liberal activist while out in America, Normal people are all, “Nah, I don’t buy it. Confirm him.

Leave it to our unelite elite to be willingly grifted by this nonsense, and watch them bend over backwards to avoid saying what any Normal person would say – “No.”

“AFTER THREE MONTHS OF PREPARING, I CAN’T POSSIBLY TESTIFY MONDAY.”

“How about we move it from Monday to Wednesday?”

“STOP BULLYING ME!”

"We’re sorry! We want to hear your story.”

“THEN WHERE’S MY PONY?”

“We have a pony for you. He’s a nice pony. His name is Tim.”

“BUT WHERE’S HIS HORN? I ASKED FOR A UNICORN! NOT GIVING ME A UNICORN IS MISOGYNY AT ITS WORST!”

“Okay, instead of Tim, this is Chet the unicorn…”

“STOP SILENCING ME BY TRYING TO HAVE ME TESTIFY!”

This woman’s performance rider has more provisions than Van Halen’s. If she ever does show up – maybe she’s in her Prius scooting across the country as we speak, along with her unicorn – she’ll probably walk out when she discovers the witness table candy bowl contains brown M&Ms.

It doesn’t help that the rules about what does and doesn’t disqualify someone from something seem to be – let me be charitable – in flux.

We keep hearing about how we’re supposed to believe women making accusations without bothering to confirm them, as if the Duke lacrosse team and the UVA frat frauds didn’t happen, and as if every few weeks we don’t see another story of some poor sucker walking out of jail after doing a decade in the stoney lonesome because some chick got buzzed, got busy, then decided to call the cops rather than let her BF find out she was tramping around. But Normals get it. They understand life isn’t the black-and-white, Manichean SJW paradigm where all girls are angels and all boys are monsters. And they wonder why the “Well, some woman said you were bad so you’re ruined” principle – there’s that weasel word again, principle – only seems to apply to Normals and those Normals like.

Let’s review liberalism’s greatest hits, literally. Keith Ellison, right now. Bill Clinton’s chivalrous “Better put some ice on that.” Ted Kennedy’s confirmed kill. Bob Menendez, trolling for jailbait in the Caribbean. Tom Carper allegedly slapping around his wife. Sherrod Brown’s wife said in a filing (I assume it was sworn) that he manhandled her in 1986 – as an adult, and several years more recently than whenever the Kavanaugh thing supposedly happened. Oh, but wait, now the ex-Mrs. Brown is walking it back. So, either Ohio’s Champion of the Chicks beat on her, or she lied about it, which we’re told never ever happens, you misogynist monster for even thinking that. Both possibilities kind of detonate the narrative.

Except they don’t, because the narrative is a lie.

Even if true, should this disqualify Kavanaugh 36 years later, after an indisputably pristine and exemplary life (the total lack of anyone else making this kind of allegation is powerful evidence her accusation is false; Normals know that pervs always re-perv)?

Libs manifestly would not care if it was one of their own, and their double standard is unacceptable. Choose one rule and stick to it. The fact is that such acts only act to bar those who Normals support. Let’s look at yet another Democrat with car trouble, Tex Kennedy. Beto got hammered at 26, drove into traffic, and tried to run from the cops. But that’s okay, apparently. We’re supposed to forgive and forget the undisputed act of an adult who nearly killed people then split. That doesn’t disqualify him from office? Why is that?

What’s the rule? You can slap around your spouse as an adult, and you get a pass? Credible rape claims as an adult, and hail to the chief? Leave a woman to drown, as an adult, a senator, and you’re the Lion of the Senate? Booze it up and hit the gas – as an adult – but who cares?

That seems incongruous. Gosh, what’s the common thread between all these malefactors? Adults, Democrats, up to kill babies. Gee, I’m seeing a pattern. But minor, Republican, not wanting to kill babies – unforgiveable!

“Oh, you can’t do whataboutism!” hiss the Cheese-eating surrendercons. Baloney. Whataboutism is a moral necessity, because it disarms the hypocrisy the left wields like a battle axe by illustrating the undeniable truth. Democrats don’t care if Kavanaugh grabbed that girl, and they don’t really think it should disqualify him if he had. They just don’t want him on the Supreme Court because that will make them lose power. And power is all they care about.

So, if Brett Kavanaugh and his family must be ruined, well, they deserve it for getting in the left’s way. That will teach people to resist them. And your sons, whose lives can be wrecked by a single lie under the new Gillibrand-Hirono Standard, are next.

No. Stop this charade. Vote. Confirm Kavanaugh. And then let us Normals get on with the business of rebelling against the liberal elite.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m beginning to think Slade has learning difficulties and can’t google or watch the news to keep up with a story he is apparently very interested in.
And how many times must one keep reposting the same info for the leftards to (willfully) ignore?

I was traveling this weekend and not keeping up with political news. Read an article on fake news cnn saying that none of Ford’s witnesses can account for the party. Not sure if I’m supposed to believe cnn but if that’s true then it’s not looking good for Ford.

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

 

[hadit]

Non-partisan? Nah.

You're taking her story at face value without any corroboration at all. You assume for no reason that she's telling the truth because you don't think anyone would put themselves through something like this, then claim to be mystified that partisans would do exactly this kind of thing, thinking they were making a noble sacrifice for the good of the Party, or some such.

You believe her because you WANT to believe her, which blinds you to the holes in her story.

That's partisanship.

I don't have any reason not to believe her. And my position is not based on her alone. When you look at Kavanaugh's past judicial decisions, this dick hates women.

A judge rules on the law, not on emotion. He's not supposed to substitute what somebody wants him to feel in place of the law the way it's written.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I was traveling this weekend and not keeping up with political news. Read an article on fake news cnn saying that none of Ford’s witnesses can account for the party. Not sure if I’m supposed to believe cnn but if that’s true then it’s not looking good for Ford.

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

 

[chops_]

 

[hadit]

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

Didn't you get the memo? Many witnesses can contradict the accuser, but the only one that must be believed is one that kind of, somewhat, maybe supports her.

 

[Ame®icano]

What I get out of this is when they were in high school he tried to cop a feel one night

Shit if that makes you a sexual predator then every guy on the planet is guilty

While that may be true......they are not trying to prevent every guy on the planet from winning a nomination...only Kavanaugh, at this time.

And they may be winning......again.

MAN those Leftists have a fighting spirit! Can't deny that. By any means necessary.

Left already lost. What they're fighting is acknowledgment of losing. Typical for sore losers.

 

[Slade3200]

Non-partisan? Nah.

You're taking her story at face value without any corroboration at all. You assume for no reason that she's telling the truth because you don't think anyone would put themselves through something like this, then claim to be mystified that partisans would do exactly this kind of thing, thinking they were making a noble sacrifice for the good of the Party, or some such.

You believe her because you WANT to believe her, which blinds you to the holes in her story.

That's partisanship.

I don't have any reason not to believe her. And my position is not based on her alone. When you look at Kavanaugh's past judicial decisions, this dick hates women.

A judge rules on the law, not on emotion. He's not supposed to substitute what somebody wants him to feel in place of the law the way it's written.

No shit

 

[Slade3200]

Yes, my apologies, I hadn’t read your post about being incommunicado.

There are many sites which show the statements so you can read them for yourself. The people she claims are witnesses have no knowledge of what she is talking about.

And:

On Monday, September 17, Chairman Grassley’s staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh under penalty of felony. Democratic staff was invited to participate, and they could have asked any question they wanted to, but they declined. Judge Kavanaugh was forthright and emphatic in his testimony. He fully answered all questions. Chairman Grassley’s staff also contacted three alleged witnesses named by Dr. Ford and obtained two statements under penalty of perjury. These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

She also named a female friend as a witness who has also come out and said she has no knowledge of the allegation whatsoever and doesn’t believe she’s ever been at a party at which Kav was also present.

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

I think you would be better served going straight to the source instead of posting links of interpretations from blantantly bias news outlets. Your link was referring to the New Yorker. Here is the passage from the New Yorker article that made them draw those conclusions. Let me know if you think their assessment is honest.

———
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”

Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

 

[Sunsettommy]

I was joking about the fake news cnn thing but I appreciate the additional info you sent over. Not looking good for Ford right now, but we shall see what new nuggets unfold next week

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

I think you would be better served going straight to the source instead of posting links of interpretations from blantantly bias news outlets. Your link was referring to the New Yorker. Here is the passage from the New Yorker article that made them draw those conclusions. Let me know if you think their assessment is honest.

———
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”

Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

From YOUR link:

“In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale.”

“We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.”

Snicker...………

==============================================

Did you notice that NOT one of them actually supports her stated claims?

Meanwhile from her OWN words showing that she was on the ground roaring DRUNK and foggy headed!

From your link,

"Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words, as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

red and black bolding mine

According to her she was VERY drunk laying down on the ground when Kavanaugh allegedly pull his pants down by her. So you are going to overlook the well known fact that roaring drunk people tends to do stupid things, that she who was describes as a devout catholic allows herself to be part of a drinking game.

"Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words,..."

I didn't realize VERY DRUNK people can remember it with such a clarity, the name, the face and the penis and I know pigs flies too.....

She specifically says she was INEBRIATED, FOGGY headed and very drunk, but amazingly recalls the alleged event with unusual clarity 34 years later!

 

[Slade3200]

Apparently nuggets are unfolding. Damn this reality show has a lot of drama in it.

Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim - POLITICO Kavanaugh confirmation in renewed peril after second assault claim — POLITICO

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

I think you would be better served going straight to the source instead of posting links of interpretations from blantantly bias news outlets. Your link was referring to the New Yorker. Here is the passage from the New Yorker article that made them draw those conclusions. Let me know if you think their assessment is honest.

———
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”

Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

Did you notice that NOT one of them actually supports her stated claims?

Meanwhile from her OWN words showing that she was on the ground DRUNK!

From your link,

"Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words, as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

red and black bolding mine

According to her she was VERY drunk laying down on the ground when Kavanaugh allegedly pull his pants down by her. So you are going to overlook the well known fact that roaring drunk people tends to do stupid things, that she who was describes as a devout catholic allows herself to be part of a drinking game.

"Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words,..."

I didn't realize VERY DRUNK people can remember it with such a clarity, the name, the face and the penis and I know pigs flies too.....

She specifically says she was INEBRIATED, FOGGY headed and very drunk, but amazingly recalls the alleged event with unusual clarity 34 years later!

Yes I noticed all those observations. But you have to admit your link had a distorted spin on the story. I wasn’t at the party nor have I spoken or even seen anybody speak about the incident so like the ford story I can’t pass judgement yet. You seem to want to jump right into saying it’s all bullshit because she admitted she was drunk. I find that interesting and unrealistic. It’s fair to be skeptical and ask questions, but to draw a conclusion tells me you aren’t being fair minded.

 

[Sunsettommy]

This is about as flimsy as the first allegation, but it’s partly what the Dems have been stalling for, no doubt.
Yet again another case where named witnesses deny any knowledge of the ‘incident’ claimed by a very inebriated woman playing a drinking game who apparently can’t tell a real penis from a plastic one.
Oh such fun.

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

I think you would be better served going straight to the source instead of posting links of interpretations from blantantly bias news outlets. Your link was referring to the New Yorker. Here is the passage from the New Yorker article that made them draw those conclusions. Let me know if you think their assessment is honest.

———
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”

Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

Did you notice that NOT one of them actually supports her stated claims?

Meanwhile from her OWN words showing that she was on the ground DRUNK!

From your link,

"Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words, as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

red and black bolding mine

According to her she was VERY drunk laying down on the ground when Kavanaugh allegedly pull his pants down by her. So you are going to overlook the well known fact that roaring drunk people tends to do stupid things, that she who was describes as a devout catholic allows herself to be part of a drinking game.

"Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words,..."

I didn't realize VERY DRUNK people can remember it with such a clarity, the name, the face and the penis and I know pigs flies too.....

She specifically says she was INEBRIATED, FOGGY headed and very drunk, but amazingly recalls the alleged event with unusual clarity 34 years later!

Yes I noticed all those observations. But you have to admit your link had a distorted spin on the story. I wasn’t at the party nor have I spoken or even seen anybody speak about the incident so like the ford story I can’t pass judgement yet. You seem to want to jump right into saying it’s all bullshit because she admitted she was drunk. I find that interesting and unrealistic. It’s fair to be skeptical and ask questions, but to draw a conclusion tells me you aren’t being fair minded.

Have YOU ever been roaring drunk with a confused head?

Right from the start there are already a number of people disputing her claims....

 

[Slade3200]

Plus the “creepy porn lawyer” as Tucker calls him, says he has another victim and several witnesses that validate her story. Flood gates are opening. Do you think it is all a coordinated lie?

Actually NONE of the SIX named "witnesses" supported the second accuser:

New Yorker Publishes Accusation Containing ZERO Evidence to Support, and 100% of Evidence To Refute…

Pathetic!

I think you would be better served going straight to the source instead of posting links of interpretations from blantantly bias news outlets. Your link was referring to the New Yorker. Here is the passage from the New Yorker article that made them draw those conclusions. Let me know if you think their assessment is honest.

———
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”

Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

Did you notice that NOT one of them actually supports her stated claims?

Meanwhile from her OWN words showing that she was on the ground DRUNK!

From your link,

"Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words, as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

red and black bolding mine

According to her she was VERY drunk laying down on the ground when Kavanaugh allegedly pull his pants down by her. So you are going to overlook the well known fact that roaring drunk people tends to do stupid things, that she who was describes as a devout catholic allows herself to be part of a drinking game.

"Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words,..."

I didn't realize VERY DRUNK people can remember it with such a clarity, the name, the face and the penis and I know pigs flies too.....

She specifically says she was INEBRIATED, FOGGY headed and very drunk, but amazingly recalls the alleged event with unusual clarity 34 years later!

Yes I noticed all those observations. But you have to admit your link had a distorted spin on the story. I wasn’t at the party nor have I spoken or even seen anybody speak about the incident so like the ford story I can’t pass judgement yet. You seem to want to jump right into saying it’s all bullshit because she admitted she was drunk. I find that interesting and unrealistic. It’s fair to be skeptical and ask questions, but to draw a conclusion tells me you aren’t being fair minded.

Have YOU ever been roaring drunk with a confused head?

Right from the start there are already a number of people disputing her claims....

I had plenty of drunk nights from college that I have a hazy recollection of. I think that’s true for most people especially thinking back to college. I also remember specific significant events from many of those nights including people I was with and things that we did. Is that really a surprising thing? I’d think most people could understand and relate.

 

[Sunsettommy]

More evidence that what the Democrats are doing is to DELIBERATELY delay the nomination process as long as they can, Ford OBVIOUSLY no longer has a credible allegation, so by a miracle a new accuser suddenly show up just in time to keep the farce going.

Senate Judiciary panel’s top Democrat calls for delay in Kavanaugh hearing after new allegation

Democrats don't realize they are destroying themselves over this blatant gambit to delay the nomination vote.