CDZ Is it time to create a new thread, "Honesty"?

[Wry Catcher]

I didn't attack you, and this meme is well within your quote:

"When I research things I rarely go to the major US news sources since they are very biased".

This quote is an opinion, based on a BIG LIE first issued by Limbaugh and echoed over and over again.

LOL you deny that MSNBC and CNN are Biased? What world do you live in?

WHEN are you people going to learn the difference between fact and bias? We all have to filter our information for bias. It is what intelligent people do. But if I want facts I go to the MSM which I know verifies its sources. I don't go there for opinions. I go there for the facts.

And yet you and others insisted Blasey Ford was telling the truth despite the lack of corroborating facts or witnesses and despite her own lies.
You also insisted in a thread you made that Kavanaugh was drunk and drugged at his testimony, and that his wife was on tranquillisers, and that he used her tranquillisers for his testimony.
None of this - ABSOLUTELY NONE - had any basis in anything other than your imagination.

I don't know if Dr. Ford was truthful, nor do I know if Judge Kavanaugh was truthful. However, in a trial the judge tells the jurors to use common sense in evaluating the testimony, as more or less credible.

I watched every minute of the testimony of both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, and concluded Dr. Ford was more credible than Judge Kavanaugh. I didn't watch or listen to the commentary by the talking heads on any source.

I formed my opinion based on the words they spoke, their body language and the emotions which permeated through their testimony. And, when Judge Kavanaough attacked the Democratic Party, the Clinton's and a conspiracy theory he lost me.

.

That you found someone telling demonstrable lies more ‘credible’ speaks only to your bias and partisanship, and certainly not truth or honesty.

Please enlighten me, who told some "demonstrable lies more ‘credible’ speaks only to your bias" is in fact an indictment of your bias.

My conclusion was subjective, but not a result of a bias, it was a considered judgment based on my education, and experience as an officer of the court.

Of course you don't have to believe me, but please explain how you reached your conclusion.

 

[Lewdog]

There is nothing to assume here. He even had in his yearbook that he was part of a club that had sex with a girl from a nearby town.

Again where is the hard evidence of this?

If this is a thread about the Truth, why not admit some truth, namely that it doesn't matter if this stuff is true or not, you just don't want BK on the Supreme Court.

I most certainly care if it is the truth or not. We don't need a person that will lie under oath serving on the Supreme Court.

...and before you build a strawman, I said that Clinton should have been thrown out of office for lying under oath.

I strongly believe you are deluding yourself in this matter.

And of course you have proof of you saying that Clinton should have been tossed, contemporary proof.

Proof? Look through any post you want on here. I've always said that from day one.

Kavanaugh and his buddies created a group and posted the group in their yearbook bragging about all of them sleeping with the same girl at a neighboring school and saying she was a slut. When Kavanaugh got caught on it, he said it was just guys that have "danced" with her. The only person being delusional here is you.

You don't care about the character, ethics, or moral fiber of an individual in government as long as they are a Republican and will more than likely vote or make decisions you agree with. It's called being a sell-out.

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

 

[martybegan]

Again where is the hard evidence of this?

If this is a thread about the Truth, why not admit some truth, namely that it doesn't matter if this stuff is true or not, you just don't want BK on the Supreme Court.

I most certainly care if it is the truth or not. We don't need a person that will lie under oath serving on the Supreme Court.

...and before you build a strawman, I said that Clinton should have been thrown out of office for lying under oath.

I strongly believe you are deluding yourself in this matter.

And of course you have proof of you saying that Clinton should have been tossed, contemporary proof.

Proof? Look through any post you want on here. I've always said that from day one.

Kavanaugh and his buddies created a group and posted the group in their yearbook bragging about all of them sleeping with the same girl at a neighboring school and saying she was a slut. When Kavanaugh got caught on it, he said it was just guys that have "danced" with her. The only person being delusional here is you.

You don't care about the character, ethics, or moral fiber of an individual in government as long as they are a Republican and will more than likely vote or make decisions you agree with. It's called being a sell-out.

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

 

[Lewdog]

I most certainly care if it is the truth or not. We don't need a person that will lie under oath serving on the Supreme Court.

...and before you build a strawman, I said that Clinton should have been thrown out of office for lying under oath.

I strongly believe you are deluding yourself in this matter.

And of course you have proof of you saying that Clinton should have been tossed, contemporary proof.

Proof? Look through any post you want on here. I've always said that from day one.

Kavanaugh and his buddies created a group and posted the group in their yearbook bragging about all of them sleeping with the same girl at a neighboring school and saying she was a slut. When Kavanaugh got caught on it, he said it was just guys that have "danced" with her. The only person being delusional here is you.

You don't care about the character, ethics, or moral fiber of an individual in government as long as they are a Republican and will more than likely vote or make decisions you agree with. It's called being a sell-out.

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

The yearbook is just ONE piece of evidence. Take for example Mark Judge's book about them getting drunk and banging girls...

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I strongly believe you are deluding yourself in this matter.

And of course you have proof of you saying that Clinton should have been tossed, contemporary proof.

Proof? Look through any post you want on here. I've always said that from day one.

Kavanaugh and his buddies created a group and posted the group in their yearbook bragging about all of them sleeping with the same girl at a neighboring school and saying she was a slut. When Kavanaugh got caught on it, he said it was just guys that have "danced" with her. The only person being delusional here is you.

You don't care about the character, ethics, or moral fiber of an individual in government as long as they are a Republican and will more than likely vote or make decisions you agree with. It's called being a sell-out.

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

The yearbook is just ONE piece of evidence. Take for example Mark Judge's book about them getting drunk and banging girls...

We must have a hundred million rapists in our country if getting drunk and having sex is considered rape.

You are motivated by your bias, here, and trying to cast aspersions based upon actions that most of us have indulged in at one time or another.

Perhaps you are a saint, and so never had sex with a girl while drinking, but you are a rarity, if so. If not, you are behaving in a hypocritical fashion, which is not exactly honest.

 

[Windparadox]

`
While similar in many respects, truth and facts are two different things. In court for example, you swear to tell the truth, not the facts. The difference is nuanced to a point some cannot understand it.

 

[eagle1462010]

LOL you deny that MSNBC and CNN are Biased? What world do you live in?

WHEN are you people going to learn the difference between fact and bias? We all have to filter our information for bias. It is what intelligent people do. But if I want facts I go to the MSM which I know verifies its sources. I don't go there for opinions. I go there for the facts.

And yet you and others insisted Blasey Ford was telling the truth despite the lack of corroborating facts or witnesses and despite her own lies.
You also insisted in a thread you made that Kavanaugh was drunk and drugged at his testimony, and that his wife was on tranquillisers, and that he used her tranquillisers for his testimony.
None of this - ABSOLUTELY NONE - had any basis in anything other than your imagination.

I don't know if Dr. Ford was truthful, nor do I know if Judge Kavanaugh was truthful. However, in a trial the judge tells the jurors to use common sense in evaluating the testimony, as more or less credible.

I watched every minute of the testimony of both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, and concluded Dr. Ford was more credible than Judge Kavanaugh. I didn't watch or listen to the commentary by the talking heads on any source.

I formed my opinion based on the words they spoke, their body language and the emotions which permeated through their testimony. And, when Judge Kavanaough attacked the Democratic Party, the Clinton's and a conspiracy theory he lost me.

.

That you found someone telling demonstrable lies more ‘credible’ speaks only to your bias and partisanship, and certainly not truth or honesty.

Please enlighten me, who told some "demonstrable lies more ‘credible’ speaks only to your bias" is in fact an indictment of your bias.

My conclusion was subjective, but not a result of a bias, it was a considered judgment based on my education, and experience as an officer of the court.

Of course you don't have to believe me, but please explain how you reached your conclusion.

Wasn't in a court now was it. Maryland would be the proper place to file that complaint.........Did she do so........Nope.

No statute of limitations if it was a so called violent rape attempt as she claimed..........The complaint requires basic information.......When and Where......and witnesses..........

Epic fail.......period.........if she has proof.......she could file a complaint today.......Wasn't about that now was it........A Job interview.....LOL

 

[Lewdog]

Proof? Look through any post you want on here. I've always said that from day one.

Kavanaugh and his buddies created a group and posted the group in their yearbook bragging about all of them sleeping with the same girl at a neighboring school and saying she was a slut. When Kavanaugh got caught on it, he said it was just guys that have "danced" with her. The only person being delusional here is you.

You don't care about the character, ethics, or moral fiber of an individual in government as long as they are a Republican and will more than likely vote or make decisions you agree with. It's called being a sell-out.

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

The yearbook is just ONE piece of evidence. Take for example Mark Judge's book about them getting drunk and banging girls...

We must have a hundred million rapists in our country if getting drunk and having sex is considered rape.

You are motivated by your bias, here, and trying to cast aspersions based upon actions that most of us have indulged in at one time or another.

Perhaps you are a saint, and so never had sex with a girl while drinking, but you are a rarity, if so. If not, you are behaving in a hypocritical fashion, which is not exactly honest.

Being drunk is NOT an excuse for rape. If a woman says no, it means no. Period. Even if she tells you at the bar she wants to have sex... and you take her home and you get naked, if she tells you no before the act, then that means no. Period. End of story.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

Kavanaugh lost all credibility when he told the nation he was a virgin until he got married and that "the devil's triangle" was a drinking game involving quarters.

In a REAL court of law, when a person gets caught telling even the littlest lie, they lose credibility and anything they say beyond those lies is worthless.

Meanwhile Ford lied about her door, about how many boys were in the room, about a fear of flying, and about coaching people to pass the polygraph. As to devils Triangle we have contemporaneous of Kavanaugh all saying it was a drinking game as well.

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

 

[Lewdog]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

Kavanaugh lost all credibility when he told the nation he was a virgin until he got married and that "the devil's triangle" was a drinking game involving quarters.

In a REAL court of law, when a person gets caught telling even the littlest lie, they lose credibility and anything they say beyond those lies is worthless.

Meanwhile Ford lied about her door, about how many boys were in the room, about a fear of flying, and about coaching people to pass the polygraph. As to devils Triangle we have contemporaneous of Kavanaugh all saying it was a drinking game as well.

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

Yes... does that means she doesn't have a fear of flying? She didn't ASK to be brought into this issue and have to testify to congress and the FBI. They should have gone to her to do it, not her having to fly to them.

I know LOTS of people that have a fear of flying that do so when they have to... and a lot of them will take medicine that makes them sleep the entire flight.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The thing is you are elevating miniscule details into something that is far more concrete. Dates, times, locations, visual descriptions of what happened are what are challenged in a court environment. Not the recollections of who had sex when and of some guys drinking game.

You don't understand that lying about the little stuff means that if a person will lie about stuff that doesn't matter, means they will easily lie about stuff that truly does matter. It is common sense.

And what you don't understand is that these type of things can never be answered completely to prove either truth or lie.

On the other hand Ford's fibs were more material to her story, her fabricated "fear of flying" and the whole "escape door" thing.

Right.... You think the captain of the football and basketball team, valedictorian, and rich kid from Maryland that went to Yale and got drunk almost every weekend, was a virgin until he got married.

Now who's talking about assumptions, and who's talking about fact?

You also include some nice projection in there.

There is nothing to assume here. He even had in his yearbook that he was part of a club that had sex with a girl from a nearby town.

No he did not.

 

[deanrd]

Honesty?

Republicans wouldn't have anything to say.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You are constructing a situation based maybe on your own experiences at best, and on your hoped for outcome at worst. None of this would be admissible in court, and none of it has been corroborated to the exclusion of exculpatory testimony or interviews backing up BK.

I care about evidence, provable verifiable evidence. The kicker in all this is that BK was perfectly fine for the DC Circuit Court, the 2nd highest in the country, but all a sudden because he was taking over a "swing' seat" the dirt diggers dug some more, and cared less about the veracity of their claims.

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

The yearbook is just ONE piece of evidence. Take for example Mark Judge's book about them getting drunk and banging girls...

We must have a hundred million rapists in our country if getting drunk and having sex is considered rape.

You are motivated by your bias, here, and trying to cast aspersions based upon actions that most of us have indulged in at one time or another.

Perhaps you are a saint, and so never had sex with a girl while drinking, but you are a rarity, if so. If not, you are behaving in a hypocritical fashion, which is not exactly honest.

Being drunk is NOT an excuse for rape. If a woman says no, it means no. Period. Even if she tells you at the bar she wants to have sex... and you take her home and you get naked, if she tells you no before the act, then that means no. Period. End of story.

I never said it did. Obviously.

You are trying to cast aspersions on him simply because he had sex when drunk .That is NOT rape.

Have you ever had sex when drunk? Do at least TRY to be honest. Here, ok? If you ever had sex when drunk. Then you are being a hypocrite for attacking him for doing so .

 

[Lewdog]

You don't understand that lying about the little stuff means that if a person will lie about stuff that doesn't matter, means they will easily lie about stuff that truly does matter. It is common sense.

And what you don't understand is that these type of things can never be answered completely to prove either truth or lie.

On the other hand Ford's fibs were more material to her story, her fabricated "fear of flying" and the whole "escape door" thing.

Right.... You think the captain of the football and basketball team, valedictorian, and rich kid from Maryland that went to Yale and got drunk almost every weekend, was a virgin until he got married.

Now who's talking about assumptions, and who's talking about fact?

You also include some nice projection in there.

There is nothing to assume here. He even had in his yearbook that he was part of a club that had sex with a girl from a nearby town.

No he did not.

Yes he did.

"“Renate Alumnius”
Thanks to a New York Times article, the American public now knows that this is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin) — a high school acquaintance of Kavanaugh’s who went to a Catholic girls’ school in the area, and who was one of the 65 women who signed a letter earlier this month attesting that Kavanaugh “behaved honorably and treated women with respect” during his high school years.

Kavanaugh was one of 14 Georgetown Prep students whose yearbook entries made some reference to Renate. (Another student’s yearbook page featured a short poem: “You need a date / And it’s getting late / So don’t hesitate / To call Renate.”) There’s even a picture of “Renate Alumni” in the yearbook, featuring nine football players — including Kavanaugh.

Dolphin appears not to have known about the yearbook in-joke until recently — and when she found out, she was so upset that she withdrew her endorsement of the sign-on letter.

“I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means,” Dolphin told the Times. “I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way.”

The “insinuation” in question is spelled out by two classmates of Kavanaugh’s, who told the Times the yearbook jokes were a form of bragging about sexual “conquest.”

Kavanaugh disputes that characterization. “That yearbook reference was clumsily intended to show affection, and that she was one of us,” he said Thursday. “But in this circus, the media’s interpreted the term is related to sex.”

Kavanaugh told MacCallum that he remained a virgin “well into college.” That doesn’t directly rebut Ford’s allegations — the only ones ostensibly under discussion Thursday. But it does speak to his efforts to portray himself as the opposite of the boorish partier depicted in both Ramirez’s and Ford’s accounts.

Let’s take Kavanaugh at his word. That means that he and 13 of his classmates all made jokes in a yearbook — complete with a group photo — about having gone on dates with a particular girl. And the girl wasn’t in on the “joke.”

Kavanaugh apologized to Dolphin (though not by name) on Thursday: “I’m so sorry to her for that yearbook reference. This may sound a bit trivial, given all that we are here for, but one thing I want to try to make sure — sure of in the future is my friendship with her. She was and is a great person.” But if the yearbook entry was intended solely to show affection, what, exactly, was Kavanaugh apologizing for?"

Brett Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook, explained as best anyone can explain it

How did Kavanaugh explain the group under oath? He said it was just a group of boys that "danced" with her. Sure... the only people that believe that are Republicans who want him on the Supreme Court and could care less about him telling the truth.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

Kavanaugh lost all credibility when he told the nation he was a virgin until he got married and that "the devil's triangle" was a drinking game involving quarters.

In a REAL court of law, when a person gets caught telling even the littlest lie, they lose credibility and anything they say beyond those lies is worthless.

Meanwhile Ford lied about her door, about how many boys were in the room, about a fear of flying, and about coaching people to pass the polygraph. As to devils Triangle we have contemporaneous of Kavanaugh all saying it was a drinking game as well.

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

Yes... does that means she doesn't have a fear of flying? She didn't ASK to be brought into this issue and have to testify to congress and the FBI. They should have gone to her to do it, not her having to fly to them.

I know LOTS of people that have a fear of flying that do so when they have to... and a lot of them will take medicine that makes them sleep the entire flight.

Actually since the senate committee OFFERED to fly to her her lie is even more glaring.

 

[Lewdog]

No, I'm not. Why do you keep ignoring the yearbook group?

I'm done arguing with you because you won't look at the entire picture and you have sold out your beliefs for tribalism.

Because it really isn't evidence. It's 30+ year old teenage boy bluster that people are trying to discern like a tribal talisman.

The yearbook is just ONE piece of evidence. Take for example Mark Judge's book about them getting drunk and banging girls...

We must have a hundred million rapists in our country if getting drunk and having sex is considered rape.

You are motivated by your bias, here, and trying to cast aspersions based upon actions that most of us have indulged in at one time or another.

Perhaps you are a saint, and so never had sex with a girl while drinking, but you are a rarity, if so. If not, you are behaving in a hypocritical fashion, which is not exactly honest.

Being drunk is NOT an excuse for rape. If a woman says no, it means no. Period. Even if she tells you at the bar she wants to have sex... and you take her home and you get naked, if she tells you no before the act, then that means no. Period. End of story.

I never said it did. Obviously.

You are trying to cast aspersions on him simply because he had sex when drunk .That is NOT rape.

Have you ever had sex when drunk? Do at least TRY to be honest. Here, ok? If you ever had sex when drunk. Then you are being a hypocrite for attacking him for doing so .

Did he have sex or not? He said he was a virgin until he got married? Quit moving the goal posts. Which is it? Why should we have to have such a complicated discussion about this?

 

[Lewdog]

Kavanaugh lost all credibility when he told the nation he was a virgin until he got married and that "the devil's triangle" was a drinking game involving quarters.

In a REAL court of law, when a person gets caught telling even the littlest lie, they lose credibility and anything they say beyond those lies is worthless.

Meanwhile Ford lied about her door, about how many boys were in the room, about a fear of flying, and about coaching people to pass the polygraph. As to devils Triangle we have contemporaneous of Kavanaugh all saying it was a drinking game as well.

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

Yes... does that means she doesn't have a fear of flying? She didn't ASK to be brought into this issue and have to testify to congress and the FBI. They should have gone to her to do it, not her having to fly to them.

I know LOTS of people that have a fear of flying that do so when they have to... and a lot of them will take medicine that makes them sleep the entire flight.

Actually since the senate committee OFFERED to fly to her her lie is even more glaring.

They ended up asking her to come do a full public interview in front of the entire Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Meanwhile Ford lied about her door, about how many boys were in the room, about a fear of flying, and about coaching people to pass the polygraph. As to devils Triangle we have contemporaneous of Kavanaugh all saying it was a drinking game as well.

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

Yes... does that means she doesn't have a fear of flying? She didn't ASK to be brought into this issue and have to testify to congress and the FBI. They should have gone to her to do it, not her having to fly to them.

I know LOTS of people that have a fear of flying that do so when they have to... and a lot of them will take medicine that makes them sleep the entire flight.

Actually since the senate committee OFFERED to fly to her her lie is even more glaring.

They ended up asking her to come do a full public interview in front of the entire Senate Judiciary Committee.

That's because she never responded to their offer.

 

[eagle1462010]

A thread about Honesty..........and divulges to a thread about Ford..........LOL

HONESTLY....

 

[Lewdog]

There is a difference between lying and not properly remembering something. And no, Ford didn't lie about her fear of flying.

Ohh really? She routinely flies across the pacific on vacation and routinely flies across the US to visit her family but ya we are to believe she was terrified to fly to DC.

Yes... does that means she doesn't have a fear of flying? She didn't ASK to be brought into this issue and have to testify to congress and the FBI. They should have gone to her to do it, not her having to fly to them.

I know LOTS of people that have a fear of flying that do so when they have to... and a lot of them will take medicine that makes them sleep the entire flight.

Actually since the senate committee OFFERED to fly to her her lie is even more glaring.

They ended up asking her to come do a full public interview in front of the entire Senate Judiciary Committee.

That's because she never responded to their offer.

Obviously she did, she was there at the hearing.