If Fords testimony is true...

[Aldo Raine]

Bart lied continually about his drinking. Why lie.

How do you know the people making the claim about his drinking aren't lying?

After all, if you are in Yale and nothing but a drunk, you are not going to graduate at the top of your class. My niece and nephew went to college, and they both said there is very little party time like the movies depict. It's go to class all day and study most nights.

His roommate corroborated what others claimed as well.

He and his roommate probably either didn't get along, or had some bad blood between them when they parted. In any case, that's not what is called evidence. Furthermore there is no legal definition of what is too much to drink outside of operating a motor vehicle. Being drunk is subjective. I have neighbors that are drunks, but that's my opinion of them. Opinions are not evidence.

Like Ford may have had with an ex boyfriend. Once again since you have the facts on the ex roommate you should contact the FBI about it. He needs to be questioned and if he is found lying prosecute.

Go for it. You don’t have the fortitude to do it alone?

No puss-puss I do not have the authority.

 

[Rustic]

How do you know the people making the claim about his drinking aren't lying?

After all, if you are in Yale and nothing but a drunk, you are not going to graduate at the top of your class. My niece and nephew went to college, and they both said there is very little party time like the movies depict. It's go to class all day and study most nights.

His roommate corroborated what others claimed as well.

He and his roommate probably either didn't get along, or had some bad blood between them when they parted. In any case, that's not what is called evidence. Furthermore there is no legal definition of what is too much to drink outside of operating a motor vehicle. Being drunk is subjective. I have neighbors that are drunks, but that's my opinion of them. Opinions are not evidence.

Like Ford may have had with an ex boyfriend. Once again since you have the facts on the ex roommate you should contact the FBI about it. He needs to be questioned and if he is found lying prosecute.

Go for it. You don’t have the fortitude to do it alone?

No puss-puss I do not have the authority.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Look through several of these threads for the last week. Many have wanted her locked up. Sound familiar dupe?

Agreed that would never happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So we are not a nation of laws. Aren't you all about law and order?

You should use capital letters to acknowledge your screaming

No reason to scream at a loser like you.

We know! Believe me we know! My win is actually a loss! Wow!

No you and your life are a loser. It is what and who you are, wear it.

 

[Aldo Raine]

So you do not believe in law and order. I knew you were nothing but a partisan stooge. Thank you for confirming.

Sure I believe in law and order. But the Democrats created this story so there is no evidence pro or con. Their only mission was to stall this conformation past midterms, or better yet, Kavanaugh pull out entirely so they could start the process all over again and drag it out past midterms.

Lol, you know this for a fact? Then you should share your facts with the FBI so they can prosecute her. Do you need the number to the local FBI office?

WTF!! Now you want evidence?

I have always wanted evidence dimwit. Law and order.

What was the evidence then?

Wtf you are dense, that is what the FBI is to find out?

 

[Aldo Raine]

So you do not believe in law and order. I knew you were nothing but a partisan stooge. Thank you for confirming.

Sure I believe in law and order. But the Democrats created this story so there is no evidence pro or con. Their only mission was to stall this conformation past midterms, or better yet, Kavanaugh pull out entirely so they could start the process all over again and drag it out past midterms.

Lol, you know this for a fact? Then you should share your facts with the FBI so they can prosecute her. Do you need the number to the local FBI office?

Did I state it was a fact? Only pointing out the obvious is all.

If it is so obvious it needs investigated and she needs prosecuted, law and order Ray Ray.

It’s going to be according to Graham! Let’s watch!

Without an investigation, you are dumber than Gaham.

 

[Rustic]

Agreed that would never happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So we are not a nation of laws. Aren't you all about law and order?

You should use capital letters to acknowledge your screaming

No reason to scream at a loser like you.

We know! Believe me we know! My win is actually a loss! Wow!

No you and your life are a loser. It is what and who you are, wear it.

 

[Aldo Raine]

His roommate corroborated what others claimed as well.

He and his roommate probably either didn't get along, or had some bad blood between them when they parted. In any case, that's not what is called evidence. Furthermore there is no legal definition of what is too much to drink outside of operating a motor vehicle. Being drunk is subjective. I have neighbors that are drunks, but that's my opinion of them. Opinions are not evidence.

Like Ford may have had with an ex boyfriend. Once again since you have the facts on the ex roommate you should contact the FBI about it. He needs to be questioned and if he is found lying prosecute.

Go for it. You don’t have the fortitude to do it alone?

No puss-puss I do not have the authority.

So nothing, just trolling as always.

 

[Aldo Raine]

So we are not a nation of laws. Aren't you all about law and order?

You should use capital letters to acknowledge your screaming

No reason to scream at a loser like you.

We know! Believe me we know! My win is actually a loss! Wow!

No you and your life are a loser. It is what and who you are, wear it.

Law and order!

 

[Rustic]

You should use capital letters to acknowledge your screaming

No reason to scream at a loser like you.

We know! Believe me we know! My win is actually a loss! Wow!

No you and your life are a loser. It is what and who you are, wear it.

Law and order!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Okay, so here is how the investigation would go:

Agent: did you do the things Mrs. Ford said you did to her?
Kavanaugh: Never, and I've never done anything like that to any girl.

Agent: Did Brett Kavanaugh attack you when you went to a party?
Ford: Yes he did.

Okay, so where should the FBI go after that?

They are experts at interrogation, and they may be able expose lies and or new information. But no one will know now because they either did not do their jobs or were ordered not to. Law and order Ray, why are you against it.

How is Josh Mandel doing in his bid to unseat Brown. You told me he was a shoe in. Just wondering how that is going right now.

He withdrew because of family problems. If he stayed in, he would have been a shoe-in.

The FBI are experts which is why they didn't want to take the case in the first place. They knew there was nothing there for them to latch on to. They interviewed Judge and the several other witnesses Ford pointed out, and they all said the same thing: Ford is FOS.

Or do you think Kavanaugh would break down under FBI questioning (which he's been interviewed many times by the FBI) and say he did it? Or were you expecting Ford to do the same?

There are no questions you can ask either of these people that could be used as evidence.

Family issues, ROTFLMAO! Then why is he running for another political position? Let me tell you why, the TOP read the tea leaves and know he was going to get stomped, plus the Koch brothers told them no money for a sure fired loser like Joshey! So they served up Jimi, who might make it closer but is still a double digit loser.

I believe the liar could possibly crack and that is why both most be interrogated. But they did not want to go there, why. Remember Rump even said she gave credible testimony until it was show time then he fed his base!

If Josh stays in Ohio, he can better handle his family problems (whatever they may be) in the state rather than from Washington. Just because he's having some problems doesn't mean he can quit working.

I think the problem with this FBI thing is you watch too many movies. Investigators only investigate. They don't sit people under a lamp two feet from their face, yell at them, scream at them, threaten to waterboard them if they don't comply. They don't force them to sit there for 72 hours like a murder investigation refusing them water or food.

Neither are they soothsayers. There are only so many questions you can ask people about something from 35 years ago. The reason for statues of limitation is because memories fade, evidence disappears, witnesses die, structures are torn down or totally remodeled. The FBI has absolutely nothing to go on except he said/ she said.

Josh is a tool and the Kochs figured it out.

They don't have to simply speaking with them and asking pertinent questions they may talk themselves into a lie.

He has done a lot of work here in Ohio and has been very productive. There is no reason for anybody to lie. He can stand on his record as well as point out Brown's record which is pretty embarrassing.

But I digress: I went to Barberton on Wednesday and seen the lines drawn on I-76. They usually don't do that until just before they open up the new road. Are those lanes opened up yet? We go there several times a week.

 

[Pogo]

If fords testimony is true, and her intentions are to advise the legislature about Kavanaugh...then why is she not releasing her “proof” (the audio recording of the polygraph, and the therapists notes) to the judicial committee for review?

If someone tried to rape you, and was about to be seated on the Supreme Court...why hide the only evidence you have?

Why does this post immediately bring to mind the Alabama Literacy Test........

SMH

The audio recording of the polygraph and the therapist notes are not "evidence" of anything except that she took a polygraph and sat with a therapist. And we already know that. Those are not in dispute.

She states that she will do so, as long as the FBI questions her, which is convieniently one of the believed restrictions on the FBI in this case. Huh, isn’t that interesting. What is also interesting is that by demanding the FBI question her after she already gave her testimony, means that she apparently purgoured herself in the original testimony if she has something different to tell the FBI.

No it does not mean that because there's no reason to ass-sume 'she has something different to tell the FBI'. You just made that up.


/thread

 

[hadit]

Because we don't put people in chains unless there is evidence. That's what they did in the Soviet Union and in places like North Korea. Apparently you don't understand what the word "evidence" means, and this is why it can't be debated with a leftist. Leftists think our justice system is based on what they don't like.

In short, evidence is proof. Suspecting something or having an opinion of something is not proof of anything.

Follow the bouncing ball Ray. THAT IS WHY THEY NEED INVESTIGATED FURTHER.

Subject: Evidence that Kavanaugh attacked Ford when they were children.

Kavanaugh drank a lot in school: Not evidence.
Ford's claim she was afraid of flying when she was not: Not evidence.
Ford's claim the attack caused her to be claustrophobic: Not evidence.
Ford's claim she had an additional door installed his her home because of claustrophobia: Not evidence.
Ford's claim Kavanaugh's attack caused her claustrophobia: Not evidence.

FBI investigation: Investigate subject only.

If she is to be charged for lying they need to investigate Ray or you only believe in law and order when it suits your political agenda. Like you have stated up thread.

Maybe it does, I don't know. What I do know is that if she was lying, it had nothing to do with the Kavanaugh investigation. They were only sent out to investigate one thing which they did; they interviewed everybody that could have been involved.

And they talked to neither party involved in said incident. Is that how good police work goes?

They already had statements from them, sworn under oath. Do you think they would have said something different?

 

[Thinker101]

Those are definitely the words of the damn circus clowns you support...dumbass.

I support Bill Mahr, or whatever his name is, really? As far as I remember he is some kind of half ass comedian, which makes him half of an ass then you!

Lol
Do you have any reading comprehension? Did you read what Bill Maher said?
He speaking about you Nutters

Nutters like you.

Here ya go.
pee wee herman i know you are but what am i - Bing video

Typical unthinker. Got one better" I am rubber and you are glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you."

Yup, why am I not surprised, I'm sure you know all of them and still use them.

 

[Thinker101]

Sure I believe in law and order. But the Democrats created this story so there is no evidence pro or con. Their only mission was to stall this conformation past midterms, or better yet, Kavanaugh pull out entirely so they could start the process all over again and drag it out past midterms.

Lol, you know this for a fact? Then you should share your facts with the FBI so they can prosecute her. Do you need the number to the local FBI office?

WTF!! Now you want evidence?

I have always wanted evidence dimwit. Law and order.

What was the evidence then?

Wtf you are dense, that is what the FBI is to find out?

WTF, the FBI should look for evidence based on an allegation? You truly are an idiot.

 

[hadit]

Okay, so here is how the investigation would go:

Agent: did you do the things Mrs. Ford said you did to her?
Kavanaugh: Never, and I've never done anything like that to any girl.

Agent: Did Brett Kavanaugh attack you when you went to a party?
Ford: Yes he did.

Okay, so where should the FBI go after that?

They are experts at interrogation, and they may be able expose lies and or new information. But no one will know now because they either did not do their jobs or were ordered not to. Law and order Ray, why are you against it.

How is Josh Mandel doing in his bid to unseat Brown. You told me he was a shoe in. Just wondering how that is going right now.

He withdrew because of family problems. If he stayed in, he would have been a shoe-in.

The FBI are experts which is why they didn't want to take the case in the first place. They knew there was nothing there for them to latch on to. They interviewed Judge and the several other witnesses Ford pointed out, and they all said the same thing: Ford is FOS.

Or do you think Kavanaugh would break down under FBI questioning (which he's been interviewed many times by the FBI) and say he did it? Or were you expecting Ford to do the same?

There are no questions you can ask either of these people that could be used as evidence.

Family issues, ROTFLMAO! Then why is he running for another political position? Let me tell you why, the TOP read the tea leaves and know he was going to get stomped, plus the Koch brothers told them no money for a sure fired loser like Joshey! So they served up Jimi, who might make it closer but is still a double digit loser.

I believe the liar could possibly crack and that is why both most be interrogated. But they did not want to go there, why. Remember Rump even said she gave credible testimony until it was show time then he fed his base!

If Josh stays in Ohio, he can better handle his family problems (whatever they may be) in the state rather than from Washington. Just because he's having some problems doesn't mean he can quit working.

I think the problem with this FBI thing is you watch too many movies. Investigators only investigate. They don't sit people under a lamp two feet from their face, yell at them, scream at them, threaten to waterboard them if they don't comply. They don't force them to sit there for 72 hours like a murder investigation refusing them water or food.

Neither are they soothsayers. There are only so many questions you can ask people about something from 35 years ago. The reason for statues of limitation is because memories fade, evidence disappears, witnesses die, structures are torn down or totally remodeled. The FBI has absolutely nothing to go on except he said/ she said.

Josh is a tool and the Kochs figured it out.

They don't have to simply speaking with them and asking pertinent questions they may talk themselves into a lie.

So is the point in this case to get the truth or to trick someone into a lie so they can be prosecuted?

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

His roommate corroborated what others claimed as well.

He and his roommate probably either didn't get along, or had some bad blood between them when they parted. In any case, that's not what is called evidence. Furthermore there is no legal definition of what is too much to drink outside of operating a motor vehicle. Being drunk is subjective. I have neighbors that are drunks, but that's my opinion of them. Opinions are not evidence.

Like Ford may have had with an ex boyfriend. Once again since you have the facts on the ex roommate you should contact the FBI about it. He needs to be questioned and if he is found lying prosecute.

Go for it. You don’t have the fortitude to do it alone?

No puss-puss I do not have the authority.

He should have testified after her and before Judge Kavanuagh, and said just this. That would have been interesting. We can hope for some more monologues prior to November.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hunarcy]

And yet you keep posting as if you know the truth. Makes you fairly dishonest.

Nope I keep saying the FBI needs to interview both people to help get to the truth. Please try and keep up Raymond.

The two people have already testified before the Senate. No need to interview them again. And why do I need to keep up with Raymond?

Because you can't.

You are behaving trollish.

You are a troll

I've been here long enough that people know I'm not a troll. Of course, the people who call me a troll are the ones who act trollish. Thanks for confirming my observation of you.

 

[sakinago]

If fords testimony is true, and her intentions are to advise the legislature about Kavanaugh...then why is she not releasing her “proof” (the audio recording of the polygraph, and the therapists notes) to the judicial committee for review?

If someone tried to rape you, and was about to be seated on the Supreme Court...why hide the only evidence you have?

Why does this post immediately bring to mind the Alabama Literacy Test........

SMH

The audio recording of the polygraph and the therapist notes are not "evidence" of anything except that she took a polygraph and sat with a therapist. And we already know that. Those are not in dispute.

She states that she will do so, as long as the FBI questions her, which is convieniently one of the believed restrictions on the FBI in this case. Huh, isn’t that interesting. What is also interesting is that by demanding the FBI question her after she already gave her testimony, means that she apparently purgoured herself in the original testimony if she has something different to tell the FBI.

No it does not mean that because there's no reason to ass-sume 'she has something different to tell the FBI'. You just made that up.


/thread

Oh no no no, pogo. We only got selective elements from the polygraph (one answer to the question “is this statement [letter she typed up describing the event]) correct?”. This is atypical of a polygraph exam, she described the test as being 3 hours, I believe. 3 hours for just one question? Sure there are control questions that are to be sprinkled in these types of things like, what’s your name, what’s today’s date, etc. But there’s definitely not 2 hours and 45 mins worth of control questions. She at one point edited the statement too. My guess is she was indicating deception, and went back to edited some things (in her own letter) to help her pass that one question. Something is fishy here about this polygraph, either there were many more questions asked about this event they did not wish to share, or it took her approximately 2 hours and 45 minutes to pass on that one question. That question being very oddly worded referring to a written statement, not specifically to the event. Usually in polygraphs (or any type of investigative line of questioning), the examiner/investigator will ask many questions in different forms, from different angles, different levels of specifity etc, in order to confirm consistency, and avoid leaving loopholes. One question about a written statement? Come on now. Let’s also not forget that polygraphs are basically pseudoscience, which is why they are not admissible in court. Can someone spot a lie using it, sure, never 100% though. True efficacy in the polygraph comes from convincing people that it is 99% effective (it isn’t), so that they feel they have to tell the truth. It’s also a test that is left up to the “interpretation” of the examiner. Basically if you’re pretty sure someone is lying about something, hook them up to the polygraph, and then accuse them of lying, then they’ll hopefully fess up. It’s all dependent on physiological indicators like heart rate, BP, respiration, perspiration etc. Lying is not even close to the only thing that causes changes in these readings. They are also a lot easier to “beat” than people think. You don’t have to be a specially trained CIA operative to “beat” one, it’s incredibly simple. One more thing to add here, exactly ZERO attorneys will ever turn to specialist (doctors, psychologists, etc), including polygraph examiners, that they’re are not sure of how “friendly” they’ll be to their case. They are paying for these specialist, to help them win, not loose. It’s a very lucrative side gig to be a “go to” specialist for these attorneys. So, for as many problems I have with using a polygraph itself, even if you believe in the validity of polygraphs...this is a very very odd test if it indeed was only in reference to one single question.

Moving on to the therapists notes. Fords reason for seeing the therapist was claimed to be to settle a dispute between her and her husband. The dispute came because her husband did not understand her need to install a second front door. She apparently developed a fear of only having one door to escape after this alleged incidence with Judge Kav. Which is why she went into detail about this event, supposedly. What we actually found out was that they remolded their house so Ford could open an in-house psych practice with a separate entrance and office, that also doubled as a room to rent out to students and such. This remodeling was done 4 years prior to this therapy session. So, already we’re seeing pretty clear deception in Fords account, and it’s clearly in attempt to bolster her claims. Now let’s talk about the notes themselves. We know about the discrepancy, 4 attackers instead of 2 attackers and Ford currently claims, and no mention of Kavanaugh. Yes, the husband disputes this, saying the therapist is mistaken, Ford said 2 attackers, and mentioned Kavanaugh. Ok...Well what is more likely? Ford, a PhD psychologist professor with her own practice, picked a really shitty therapist, who failed to do the most important part of their job, which is to listen to their patients (especially when they’re discussing a traumatic event) and make sure you get the story straight so you’re on the same page as the patient. Or maybe she was describing a different event from what she testified too, and the husband, like a majority of any other husband, is backing her up? Secondly, how on earth can we rely on what is hearsay (husbands dispute of therapists notes) 4 years after the fact, vs notes that were taken during the exact time in question by a trained professional? Bout as backwards as it gets I’d say. More importantly why only release selective areas from the therapists notes (arguably the best piece of evidence you have as flimsy as it is). Sure, you could say that nothing else is pertinent...but that’s asking everyone else to rely on your word, which is what is in question. We have zero clue of the context of the incidence in question in this session or any other therapy sessions (that probably happened, since this type of topic is not usually a one convo and done type of topic in therapy). It would be infinitely more convincing to get the notes from just this session to get better context. We don’t know if there are any other details that possibly contradict (even more so than the few provided) Fords testimony.

It is at the very least odd (extremely suspicious in my opinion) that the only two pieces of evidence that haven’t completely fallen apart...Ford and her legal team are very tight lipped on, and selectively offer only snippets without context. It’s also at the very least odd (and again suspicious) to place a non-sensical and extremely redundant condition on the release on the best and only evidence Ford had. It’s almost as if though Ford/legal team had a pretty good idea that the strange and redundant request wasn’t going to be met. Very strange indeed, considering Ford’s goal was to get the truth out there, and inform the legislature and entire nation about someone who was well on their way to be confirmed as a freaking Supreme Court judge.

To your last point. Was there something Ford failed to mention in the testimony? Yes it’s possible, but also extremely neglegent of her legal team to not get whatever other pertininant information out there. So if you can explain how they dropped the ball, and would try to pick it up, but kick out of reach right before continuously all the way off the edge of the Grand Canyon...I’m all ears.

 

[Aldo Raine]

No reason to scream at a loser like you.

We know! Believe me we know! My win is actually a loss! Wow!

No you and your life are a loser. It is what and who you are, wear it.

Law and order!

Glad to know you do not believe in democracy. You have the correct president then, because neither does he.

 

[Aldo Raine]

They are experts at interrogation, and they may be able expose lies and or new information. But no one will know now because they either did not do their jobs or were ordered not to. Law and order Ray, why are you against it.

How is Josh Mandel doing in his bid to unseat Brown. You told me he was a shoe in. Just wondering how that is going right now.

He withdrew because of family problems. If he stayed in, he would have been a shoe-in.

The FBI are experts which is why they didn't want to take the case in the first place. They knew there was nothing there for them to latch on to. They interviewed Judge and the several other witnesses Ford pointed out, and they all said the same thing: Ford is FOS.

Or do you think Kavanaugh would break down under FBI questioning (which he's been interviewed many times by the FBI) and say he did it? Or were you expecting Ford to do the same?

There are no questions you can ask either of these people that could be used as evidence.

Family issues, ROTFLMAO! Then why is he running for another political position? Let me tell you why, the TOP read the tea leaves and know he was going to get stomped, plus the Koch brothers told them no money for a sure fired loser like Joshey! So they served up Jimi, who might make it closer but is still a double digit loser.

I believe the liar could possibly crack and that is why both most be interrogated. But they did not want to go there, why. Remember Rump even said she gave credible testimony until it was show time then he fed his base!

If Josh stays in Ohio, he can better handle his family problems (whatever they may be) in the state rather than from Washington. Just because he's having some problems doesn't mean he can quit working.

I think the problem with this FBI thing is you watch too many movies. Investigators only investigate. They don't sit people under a lamp two feet from their face, yell at them, scream at them, threaten to waterboard them if they don't comply. They don't force them to sit there for 72 hours like a murder investigation refusing them water or food.

Neither are they soothsayers. There are only so many questions you can ask people about something from 35 years ago. The reason for statues of limitation is because memories fade, evidence disappears, witnesses die, structures are torn down or totally remodeled. The FBI has absolutely nothing to go on except he said/ she said.

Josh is a tool and the Kochs figured it out.

They don't have to simply speaking with them and asking pertinent questions they may talk themselves into a lie.

He has done a lot of work here in Ohio and has been very productive. There is no reason for anybody to lie. He can stand on his record as well as point out Brown's record which is pretty embarrassing.

But I digress: I went to Barberton on Wednesday and seen the lines drawn on I-76. They usually don't do that until just before they open up the new road. Are those lanes opened up yet? We go there several times a week.

Don't know yet bro just hot back from vacation last night at 11 PM. Have not been out on highway yet where construction is at.

And if Brown's record is so bad how did he defeat the mighty mite DeWine in 2006, or Joshey in 2012. He had to pull plenty of Rethug votes in this red state to do it. And when he wins again this year by double digits it most mean he did even worse for the common man.