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

[OldLady]

You've already expressed your biases, IMO, by echoing long established but never proved memes. That said, I agree checking multiple sources is one necessary ingredient. However, primary sources are those which are the most convincing and enlightening in forming an opinion.

Interviews, speeches, tweets, documents and e-mails are most telling, most of this was available to hear and watch during Kavanaugh's job interview. Active listening skills were all that was necessary to come to a yes or no vote, by those of us who did not worry about being reelected in November, or in 2020.

And what long established but never proved memes are you attacking me about in this clean debate zone?

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.

Yup. That's how he was acting. And I said "buzzed," not shitfaced. If it was tranqs, not a three beer lunch, maybe he got them from his secretary, not his wife. Does it matter?
But I am not a news reporter, I didn't manufacture a fake news link to "prove" he was under the influence, and it was not even the main point of the thread.
Yeah, it was BIASED. You get a gold star for figuring that out.

 

[Picaro]

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

What’s stopping you?

His lack of honesty, of course.

 

[martybegan]

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...

In his book does he reference BK directly?

 

[Wry Catcher]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

 

[Wry Catcher]

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

What’s stopping you?

His lack of honesty, of course.

One again I need to remind someone that this thread is posted on the CDZ. I'll leave it to the readers to determine which side of the aisle they come from.

 

[martybegan]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

 

[Wry Catcher]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

A crime, not murder per se.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Their are nuts on both sides of the aisle, but most come from the bottom of the political clock, the idiot fringe.

For those who don't know what the political clock is, it is a simple but thoughtful example of how the political demography can be graphed.

Looking at a Clock Face:

(A) 10 to 12 are the moderate Democrats (D's); 12 to 2 are moderate Republicans (R);

(B) From 8 to 10 liberal and progressive D's; 2 to 4 are conservative R's;

(C) From 7 to 8 are Radical D's; From 4 to 5 are Revolutionary R's;

(D) From 7 to 5 are the fringe groups;

Q. Where do you, the reader, put themselves. (Be honest)

I'm an AM B.

 

[martybegan]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

A crime, not murder per se.

A bit of a stretch there. In a murder case like this you have evidence of the crime itself, i.e. the body. Someone murdered her. It's a matter of figuring out who did it.

In the BK situation, you have accusations something happened, but no evidence of it beyond the words of the parties involved, and even then you don't have exact evidence of when and where.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

A crime, not murder per se.

A bit of a stretch there. In a murder case like this you have evidence of the crime itself, i.e. the body. Someone murdered her. It's a matter of figuring out who did it.

In the BK situation, you have accusations something happened, but no evidence of it beyond the words of the parties involved, and even then you don't have exact evidence of when and where.

Marty, your comment is a Straw Man. The victim in the Skakel matter could not testify, the alleged victim in the Kavanaugh hearing did. Direct testimony is evidence, and both the Dr. and the Judge testified. It is up to the "juror", the Senate, to decided who was more credible.

However, the jury split 51 yes, and 40 no; along party lines, with two exceptions (independents voted no).

Had Grassley been non partisan and allowed the vote to be held in abeyance to allow for a full vetting of Documents, the outcome may have been the same or different. But Grassley was not non partisan, and along with McConnell and Reid, we have seen what B. Franklin warned of, that we had a Republic if we could keep it. We couldn't, and it is on us, the voter who failed to put the spirit of the Constitution first.

 

[martybegan]

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.

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

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

It seems that some deniers of Dr. Ford use the decades old "case" as as an excuse, and lacking evidence after a week (weak!) investigation. Why didn't they come out in defense of Michael Skakel, a Nephew of Robert Kennedy, who was investigated and convicted of a crime decades in the past (a conviction vacated after spending 10 years in prison).

because that actually went to trial?

And do you equate attempted assault with murder?

A crime, not murder per se.

A bit of a stretch there. In a murder case like this you have evidence of the crime itself, i.e. the body. Someone murdered her. It's a matter of figuring out who did it.

In the BK situation, you have accusations something happened, but no evidence of it beyond the words of the parties involved, and even then you don't have exact evidence of when and where.

Marty, your comment is a Straw Man. The victim in the Skakel matter could not testify, the alleged victim in the Kavanaugh hearing did. Direct testimony is evidence, and both the Dr. and the Judge testified. It is up to the "juror", the Senate, to decided who was more credible.

However, the jury split 51 yes, and 40 no; along party lines, with two exceptions (independents voted no).

Had Grassley been non partisan and allowed the vote to be held in abeyance to allow for a full vetting of Documents, the outcome may have been the same or different. But Grassley was not non partisan, and along with McConnell and Reid, we have seen what B. Franklin warned of, that we had a Republic if we could keep it. We couldn't, and it is on us, the voter who failed to put the spirit of the Constitution first.

The victim being dead, and the manner in which they died is evidence that a crime has occured. Hard evidence.

When the testimony given by Ford couldn't even give a place or a date it nullified any ability of the accused (BK) to counter it.

And please don't tell me you think the Senate vote had mostly to do with Ford's accusation, 95% of those democrats would have voted no anyway.

The vetting "process" would have gone on and on and on until the Dems could have figured out a away to block his nomination permanently. It was all a political shell game.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Seems our democracy is still under attack by foreign actors and citizen agent provocateurs. $$$ Millions are being reported to confuse voters in the 2018 election.

A look at the number of active topics on this message board are examples of fear mongering and misinformation by the usual far right members.

A recent ad on ABC (Good Morning America) is a scurrilous attack on all Democrats, claiming voting for any Democrat will create higher taxes, impeachment of Trump and violence in the streets by angry mobs of Democrats.

As more and more polls are showing Democrats leading in Governor races, and Congressional ones, the right is beginning to panic and has pulled off the gloves to attack not only pols, but the millions of Americans who support a change.

See what is wrong with America, and our elections:

Video: Any Democrat - Future 45

Fear mongering and hate mongering is all the Alt Right and Republican Fellow Travelers seem to have, and someone is funding them. There is no honesty in this scurrilous behavior.

The media needs to report who is funding this fascist propaganda.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Seems our democracy is still under attack by foreign actors and citizen agent provocateurs. $$$ Millions are being reported to confuse voters in the 2018 election.

A look at the number of active topics on this message board are examples of fear mongering and misinformation by the usual far right members.

A recent ad on ABC (Good Morning America) is a scurrilous attack on all Democrats, claiming voting for any Democrat will create higher taxes, impeachment of Trump and violence in the streets by angry mobs of Democrats.

As more and more polls are showing Democrats leading in Governor races, and Congressional ones, the right is beginning to panic and has pulled off the gloves to attack not only pols, but the millions of Americans who support a change.

See what is wrong with America, and our elections:

Video: Any Democrat - Future 45

Fear mongering and hate mongering is all the Alt Right and Republican Fellow Travelers seem to have, and someone is funding them. There is no honesty in this scurrilous behavior.

The media needs to report who is funding this fascist propaganda.

LOL the democrats ACTUALLY run on claims of impeachment , repealing tax breaks and openly call for harassing and attacking Republicans and you claim it is a lie? Perhaps you are so far gone you don't know fact from fiction? You start a thread on honesty and have the gonads to post that lie? Shame on you.

 

[Darkwind]

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

This is an opinion.

NEXT!!!!

Wow.

It was a question.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Seems our democracy is still under attack by foreign actors and citizen agent provocateurs. $$$ Millions are being reported to confuse voters in the 2018 election.

A look at the number of active topics on this message board are examples of fear mongering and misinformation by the usual far right members.

A recent ad on ABC (Good Morning America) is a scurrilous attack on all Democrats, claiming voting for any Democrat will create higher taxes, impeachment of Trump and violence in the streets by angry mobs of Democrats.

As more and more polls are showing Democrats leading in Governor races, and Congressional ones, the right is beginning to panic and has pulled off the gloves to attack not only pols, but the millions of Americans who support a change.

See what is wrong with America, and our elections:

Video: Any Democrat - Future 45

Fear mongering and hate mongering is all the Alt Right and Republican Fellow Travelers seem to have, and someone is funding them. There is no honesty in this scurrilous behavior.

The media needs to report who is funding this fascist propaganda.

LOL the democrats ACTUALLY run on claims of impeachment , repealing tax breaks and openly call for harassing and attacking Republicans and you claim it is a lie? Perhaps you are so far gone you don't know fact from fiction? You start a thread on honesty and have the gonads to post that lie? Shame on you.

Mob rule? Last night Trump supported any guy who can body slam a reporter. GrowTFU, your support for a neo fascist is disgusting and un-American. The Congress under McConnell and Ryan have been coward by the bully in the White House, and IF the Republicans keep the majority in Congress, we can be sure to become like Russia or China. It can happen here and people like you will be responsible.

Some Democrats support impeachment, most Democrats realize control of the Congress, at least the H. or Rep., is most important; most do not want to pass a bill of impeachment, but to move forward and do the work of the People in terms of high taxes, a loss of deductions and fear the loss of health care.

You're either a dope or a liar when you support the rhetoric now being broadcast by dark money.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Video: Any Democrat - Future 45

Dark Money paid for this ^^^ hit piece, dark money is posting on social media that people can register to vote on Nov. 6th, that their polling place has been changed, and other lies made to suppress the vote.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Seems our democracy is still under attack by foreign actors and citizen agent provocateurs. $$$ Millions are being reported to confuse voters in the 2018 election.

A look at the number of active topics on this message board are examples of fear mongering and misinformation by the usual far right members.

A recent ad on ABC (Good Morning America) is a scurrilous attack on all Democrats, claiming voting for any Democrat will create higher taxes, impeachment of Trump and violence in the streets by angry mobs of Democrats.

As more and more polls are showing Democrats leading in Governor races, and Congressional ones, the right is beginning to panic and has pulled off the gloves to attack not only pols, but the millions of Americans who support a change.

See what is wrong with America, and our elections:

Video: Any Democrat - Future 45

Fear mongering and hate mongering is all the Alt Right and Republican Fellow Travelers seem to have, and someone is funding them. There is no honesty in this scurrilous behavior.

The media needs to report who is funding this fascist propaganda.

LOL the democrats ACTUALLY run on claims of impeachment , repealing tax breaks and openly call for harassing and attacking Republicans and you claim it is a lie? Perhaps you are so far gone you don't know fact from fiction? You start a thread on honesty and have the gonads to post that lie? Shame on you.

Mob rule? Last night Trump supported any guy who can body slam a reporter. GrowTFU, your support for a neo fascist is disgusting and un-American. The Congress under McConnell and Ryan have been coward by the bully in the White House, and IF the Republicans keep the majority in Congress, we can be sure to become like Russia or China. It can happen here and people like you will be responsible.

Some Democrats support impeachment, most Democrats realize control of the Congress, at least the H. or Rep., is most important; most do not want to pass a bill of impeachment, but to move forward and do the work of the People in terms of high taxes, a loss of deductions and fear the loss of health care.

You're either a dope or a liar when you support the rhetoric now being broadcast by dark money.

You DENIED it. When PROMINENT members of your party have OPENLY stated they support IMPEACHMENT and have run on it. They have openly stated they will REPEAL the tax breaks and have OPENLY called for harassment of Republicans. And you try and change the story? You LIED in your own thread on supposed HONESTY.

 

[Picaro]

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

What’s stopping you?

His lack of honesty, of course.

One again I need to remind someone that this thread is posted on the CDZ. I'll leave it to the readers to determine which side of the aisle they come from.

Says the guy who is pretending to care about 'honesty' while spreading the Ford scam, not only completely exposed as a lie and merely a performance, but a serious false criminal allegation. I'll remind you that you hiding your troll threads in the CDZ don't exempt you from being called on your BS.

 

[WheelieAddict]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, the the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed. others.

The problem is most people replace opinion for fact, or try to create factual arguments over something that is really opinion.

Saying "that ball is blue" is something easy to judge on a factual basis, and to determine the truth or a lie when a person says "that ball is red", or "that isn't a ball it's a howitzer"

One also has to be honest to oneself to be truthful, as people are incredibly able to believe in falsehoods, or to ignore obvious evidence that interrupts their narrative.

It's easy to be disingenuous on social media. That ball was green not blue, or that ball didn't exist. Just link to a propaganda website of your choosing to validate your "facts". Even if the falsehoods get corrected later there are already plenty that believe, especially if it supports their position/politics/worldview.

There is more access to "information" than there ever has been in the history of the human race. For truths or lies, and for good or bad.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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

What’s stopping you?

His lack of honesty, of course.

One again I need to remind someone that this thread is posted on the CDZ. I'll leave it to the readers to determine which side of the aisle they come from.

Says the guy who is pretending to care about 'honesty' while spreading the Ford scam, not only completely exposed as a lie and merely a performance, but a serious false criminal allegation. I'll remind you that you hiding your troll threads in the CDZ don't exempt you from being called on your BS.

Dr. Ford made a statement, Judge Kavanaugh made a statement and I found Dr. Ford much more credible than Judge Kavanaugh. That is my honest statement.

You claim without a bit of evidence that Dr. Ford's statement was a "fraud". Unless you have evidence which is probative of your statement, you are being dishonest.