Kavanaugh Official Merge for Oct 2nd, 2018

[Doc1]

Mitch McConnell: FBI report on Brett Kavanaugh won’t be made public

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says the FBI’s investigation into sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh won’t be made public, and instead will only be allowed to be viewed by senators before a vote is held this week.

“Only senators will be allowed to look at it,” McConnell said at a Tuesday news conference of the FBI’s report, which Republicans have demanded be wrapped up by Friday.

You are paying for it but you cant see it.

Sounds like a banana republic to me.

The only banana here is the one you use to pleasure yourself. Your country is one fucked up country. You are willing to let Radical Islam rape and murder your women and children yet you seek to judge this one.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

-Being sexually assaulted is a good motive to speak up. And if you think that what Ford did, didn't come at great personal cost you are out of your mind. So what motive do you think she has, that overcomes that cost?

She's a Democrat activist. She's been known to dance around in ***** hats protesting Trump and Republicans in general.

There are way too many holes in her story for her to be believed. If you wanted to create a story where nobody could find anything including the FBI, this is the exact way you would do it.

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

 

[forkup]

None of it is an answer. Should I vote for this guy?

When all you have is a ghost of a rumor? Of course.

It's not a ghost of a rumour. It's a second hand account of sexual assault.
Ford is a first hand account.
Ah. So my responsibility isn't to the students but to the coach? I disagree.
In the end, my responsibility lies with the safety of that girls softball team. If that means that someone qualified misses out on a job for someone else qualified that's to bad for him.

Would you like to ruin the mans entire life over an unproven allegation? How about if we did that with everybody? Why not just change our entire justice system to the liberal way: guilty until proven innocent? Seems to worked out okay for the Nazi's and Dictators of the world.

First, neither in my analogy or the actual Kavanaugh case can you speak that a life is ruined. They miss out on a job. I've not gotten every job I went after in my life, have you? I'm also of the opinion that IF he would be guilty and public shaming is the worst you suffer, you've gotten of light. I speak from personal experience, from the standpoint of someone who's wife is a victim.
Second, no one credible, as far as I'm aware is even suggesting that we prosecute Kavanaugh.
Third,guilty until proven innocent?? Lets see..... Benghazi, Pizzagate, Seth Rich, Birtherism, E-mails, that Uranium thing. If I go up and look up your position on those things, what are the chances I will find you saying innocent until proven guilty? Not saying you even have a position on all of them but at NO time did you make the claim innocent until proven guilty, on any of these things, unless I'm terribly mistaking.

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I challenged you to explain how what I wrote, meant anything like what you said.


ANd instead you attack me personally.


Standard lib response to being called on his bullshit.


You lose, loser. Oh, and you won't try to meet that challenge in your next response either, because you know you can't.

It's pretty clear that you are beneath me. You are a Trump supporter and are pro-rape. I don't associate with people who are pro-rape.

And as I predicted you are still unable to support your misrepresentation of what I said.


All you have, is more personal attacks.


You are a troll.


You lose, loser.


You want the full report released because you want to go though it, looking for anything that can be used to further attack the man, regardless of whether it is verified, or actually relevant.

I want the full report because I want all the facts to make an informed decision.

Novel concept to someone who has already decided that the report will have bad information.

But what do you expect from someone who is pro-rape.

Actually RDD, I don't think that Correll is pro rape, but I do believe that they are pro Trump to the point where they will excuse any behavior that he, or any of his appointees does.

You can sugarcoat it anyway you want. Same thing if you don't stand up to Nazi's, you might as well be one of them. If you don't stand up to Rape you might as well condone it.

We're Nazi's. but you want to make somebody guilty of a crime with zero evidence.

That's liberalism for ya.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When all you have is a ghost of a rumor? Of course.

It's not a ghost of a rumour. It's a second hand account of sexual assault.
Ford is a first hand account.
Ah. So my responsibility isn't to the students but to the coach? I disagree.
In the end, my responsibility lies with the safety of that girls softball team. If that means that someone qualified misses out on a job for someone else qualified that's to bad for him.

Would you like to ruin the mans entire life over an unproven allegation? How about if we did that with everybody? Why not just change our entire justice system to the liberal way: guilty until proven innocent? Seems to worked out okay for the Nazi's and Dictators of the world.

First, neither in my analogy or the actual Kavanaugh case can you speak that a life is ruined. They miss out on a job. I've not gotten every job I went after in my life, have you? I'm also of the opinion that IF he would be guilty and public shaming is the worst you suffer, you've gotten of light. I speak from personal experience, from the standpoint of someone who's wife is a victim.
Second, no one credible, as far as I'm aware is even suggesting that we prosecute Kavanaugh.
Third,guilty until proven innocent?? Lets see..... Benghazi, Pizzagate, Seth Rich, Birtherism, E-mails, that Uranium thing. If I go up and look up your position on those things, what are the chances I will find you saying innocent until proven guilty? Not saying you even have a position on all of them but at NO time did you make the claim innocent until proven guilty, on any of these things, unless I'm terribly mistaking.

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

 

[forkup]

-Being sexually assaulted is a good motive to speak up. And if you think that what Ford did, didn't come at great personal cost you are out of your mind. So what motive do you think she has, that overcomes that cost?

She's a Democrat activist. She's been known to dance around in ***** hats protesting Trump and Republicans in general.

There are way too many holes in her story for her to be believed. If you wanted to create a story where nobody could find anything including the FBI, this is the exact way you would do it.

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, it doesn't. It sounds like it could be full of utterly unreliable and/or personal shit that has zero relevance.

That is your opinion, based on your political views. You don't know what is in it, so you are automatically assuming it is against Kavanaugh, but if it was favorable or unbiased, it would be in favor of Kavanaugh, and therefore should be released to get the rest of America to get behind Kavanaugh.

I might be getting a bit cynical but politicians would generally clamber over their dead grandparents to get good news out there.

It looks like Kav has gone quiet about getting it all out in the open with regard to this. And the right is now passionately mounting a defence of their right not to know. ******* hypocrites.

Would you like your personal life laid open to the world, Tommy?

I would be astonished if anyone had any interest in it.

But to take your point, there is stuff I look back on and think I could have done it differently. I have had a few beers,swapped a few punches and had a few rows I regret.

But I have never claimed to be an angel, or lied about it to the nation.

The thing is that I think the US would forgive him getting drunk in his teens and making a fool of himself if he had been upfront about it. The attempted rape is another matter.

Actually, yeah. If he had been upfront about it, it would have been quite a bit different, and maybe he would already be sitting on the SC.

I know that for the first part of my career, I was one of those people who liked to party a bit much. It got me in trouble, I paid the price for it, and then I got my shit together and was a water walker for the last half of my military career. Whenever officers asked me about it during welcome aboard briefings, I answered them honestly about what I had been like before, but would tell them that I got my shit together and now have turned over a new leaf. They would look at the record of what I'd done before via my evaluations, but would also see what I had become.

If Kavanaugh had simply said that he'd been a bit of a party animal in HS, but then straightened up in college, he would have skated through this whole thing.

But no..................he first tried to tell us that all he did in HS was work out, study and go to church, trying to paint himself as a choir boy. Then, in a later interview, he admitted to REALLY liking beer and drinking.

Trump even made fun of Kavanaugh for that statement today. He said that he's never drank alcohol, but imagine what he'd be like today if he did.

But he doesn't, does he?

You are really lost in reference to what this is really about if you think Kavanaugh admitting to drinking too much would have him on the bench today. For crying out loud, you on the left are now trying to use an ice cube throwing as an excuse.

The main goal here is to stall or have Kavanaugh replaced past midterms no matter how they do it. It doesn't matter if it's rape, drinking, bar fight, whatever. As long as they can keep the courts from tilting right.

If you think it has anything other to do than that, you have no idea what you are looking at.

 

[forkup]

It's not a ghost of a rumour. It's a second hand account of sexual assault.
Ford is a first hand account.
Ah. So my responsibility isn't to the students but to the coach? I disagree.
In the end, my responsibility lies with the safety of that girls softball team. If that means that someone qualified misses out on a job for someone else qualified that's to bad for him.

Would you like to ruin the mans entire life over an unproven allegation? How about if we did that with everybody? Why not just change our entire justice system to the liberal way: guilty until proven innocent? Seems to worked out okay for the Nazi's and Dictators of the world.

First, neither in my analogy or the actual Kavanaugh case can you speak that a life is ruined. They miss out on a job. I've not gotten every job I went after in my life, have you? I'm also of the opinion that IF he would be guilty and public shaming is the worst you suffer, you've gotten of light. I speak from personal experience, from the standpoint of someone who's wife is a victim.
Second, no one credible, as far as I'm aware is even suggesting that we prosecute Kavanaugh.
Third,guilty until proven innocent?? Lets see..... Benghazi, Pizzagate, Seth Rich, Birtherism, E-mails, that Uranium thing. If I go up and look up your position on those things, what are the chances I will find you saying innocent until proven guilty? Not saying you even have a position on all of them but at NO time did you make the claim innocent until proven guilty, on any of these things, unless I'm terribly mistaking.

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

-Being sexually assaulted is a good motive to speak up. And if you think that what Ford did, didn't come at great personal cost you are out of your mind. So what motive do you think she has, that overcomes that cost?

She's a Democrat activist. She's been known to dance around in ***** hats protesting Trump and Republicans in general.

There are way too many holes in her story for her to be believed. If you wanted to create a story where nobody could find anything including the FBI, this is the exact way you would do it.

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

Right, because she only remembered the important stuff like how many beers she drank.

And thanks for bringing up that other hole--she was waiting for them to come to her. They offered to come to her long before they laid the deadline. Now if you're going to tell me she didn't know that they made the offer--her lawyers didn't know they made the offer, she never watched the media or read the newspapers to know they made the offer, then you must think I'm the dumbest member on USMB.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Would you like to ruin the mans entire life over an unproven allegation? How about if we did that with everybody? Why not just change our entire justice system to the liberal way: guilty until proven innocent? Seems to worked out okay for the Nazi's and Dictators of the world.

First, neither in my analogy or the actual Kavanaugh case can you speak that a life is ruined. They miss out on a job. I've not gotten every job I went after in my life, have you? I'm also of the opinion that IF he would be guilty and public shaming is the worst you suffer, you've gotten of light. I speak from personal experience, from the standpoint of someone who's wife is a victim.
Second, no one credible, as far as I'm aware is even suggesting that we prosecute Kavanaugh.
Third,guilty until proven innocent?? Lets see..... Benghazi, Pizzagate, Seth Rich, Birtherism, E-mails, that Uranium thing. If I go up and look up your position on those things, what are the chances I will find you saying innocent until proven guilty? Not saying you even have a position on all of them but at NO time did you make the claim innocent until proven guilty, on any of these things, unless I'm terribly mistaking.

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

 

[jc456]

I challenged you to explain how what I wrote, meant anything like what you said.


ANd instead you attack me personally.


Standard lib response to being called on his bullshit.


You lose, loser. Oh, and you won't try to meet that challenge in your next response either, because you know you can't.

Sounds like he is afraid it will be full of utter shit and not want to smear the poor guy anymore than has already been done.

This is to me your premise. Do I have a reason to read it any other way?

So. what part of that says, in your mind, that the FBI manufactured, the "shit" in question?

I highlighted it. "Full of utter shit",to me means untrue in this context. Since the FBI is making the report, this means you suggest the FBI will put lies in its report. I can't make it clearer than that.

NO, it doesn't.

The fbi will go and talk to a lot of people about a lot of stuff that may or may not have happened a long time ago.

They will tell tales, some of which are likely to be bullshit, either completely wrong, or completely irrelevant, yet embarrassing.


This seemed very obvious to me, to the point, I did not spell it out.

It was you libs, that injected accusing the FBI of lying.

There's only one side that's trying to allege the FBI report would be "full of shit." It's not Democrats.

But they know it will be. See they all heard what we did! Nothing , can’t investigate nothing

 

[forkup]

-Being sexually assaulted is a good motive to speak up. And if you think that what Ford did, didn't come at great personal cost you are out of your mind. So what motive do you think she has, that overcomes that cost?

She's a Democrat activist. She's been known to dance around in ***** hats protesting Trump and Republicans in general.

There are way too many holes in her story for her to be believed. If you wanted to create a story where nobody could find anything including the FBI, this is the exact way you would do it.

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

Right, because she only remembered the important stuff like how many beers she drank.

And thanks for bringing up that other hole--she was waiting for them to come to her. They offered to come to her long before they laid the deadline. Now if you're going to tell me she didn't know that they made the offer--her lawyers didn't know they made the offer, she never watched the media or read the newspapers to know they made the offer, then you must think I'm the dumbest member on USMB.

-In the scheme of things how important is it for me remembering the mess the ambulance people left on the floor after they were done? I'll ask you honestly to think back on something traumatic in your life and try to remember. You will find that you remember the most important things and probably a few inane details just like Ford.
-At best it's not so much a hole as proof that she wanted to stop Kavanaugh from being nominated. She readily admits to that.

 

[forkup]

First, neither in my analogy or the actual Kavanaugh case can you speak that a life is ruined. They miss out on a job. I've not gotten every job I went after in my life, have you? I'm also of the opinion that IF he would be guilty and public shaming is the worst you suffer, you've gotten of light. I speak from personal experience, from the standpoint of someone who's wife is a victim.
Second, no one credible, as far as I'm aware is even suggesting that we prosecute Kavanaugh.
Third,guilty until proven innocent?? Lets see..... Benghazi, Pizzagate, Seth Rich, Birtherism, E-mails, that Uranium thing. If I go up and look up your position on those things, what are the chances I will find you saying innocent until proven guilty? Not saying you even have a position on all of them but at NO time did you make the claim innocent until proven guilty, on any of these things, unless I'm terribly mistaking.

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

Hey Comey isn't the head of the FBI anymore. And if you think I believe Trump and the Republicans would not JUMP at the chance to get Clinton indicted if they could make it stick, you must think I'm the dumbest member of USMB.

 

[Doc1]

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

Hey Comey isn't the head of the FBI anymore. And if you think I believe Trump and the Republicans would not JUMP at the chance to get Clinton indicted if they could make it stick, you must think I'm the dumbest member of USMB.

Actually not the DUMBEST but in the running.

 

[jc456]

She's a Democrat activist. She's been known to dance around in ***** hats protesting Trump and Republicans in general.

There are way too many holes in her story for her to be believed. If you wanted to create a story where nobody could find anything including the FBI, this is the exact way you would do it.

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

Right, because she only remembered the important stuff like how many beers she drank.

And thanks for bringing up that other hole--she was waiting for them to come to her. They offered to come to her long before they laid the deadline. Now if you're going to tell me she didn't know that they made the offer--her lawyers didn't know they made the offer, she never watched the media or read the newspapers to know they made the offer, then you must think I'm the dumbest member on USMB.

-In the scheme of things how important is it for me remembering the mess the ambulance people left on the floor after they were done? I'll ask you honestly to think back on something traumatic in your life and try to remember. You will find that you remember the most important things and probably a few inane details just like Ford.
-At best it's not so much a hole as proof that she wanted to stop Kavanaugh from being nominated. She readily admits to that.

I did, and I remember the address! And I know the dude was arrested! Actual trauma leaves prints in the brain. Mine was 45 years ago. I remember like it was yesterday! You know what I can’t remember? His name or what he looks like. I called the cops who took him away, and no records exist

 

[forkup]

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

Hey Comey isn't the head of the FBI anymore. And if you think I believe Trump and the Republicans would not JUMP at the chance to get Clinton indicted if they could make it stick, you must think I'm the dumbest member of USMB.

Actually not the DUMBEST but in the running.

Well Doc, I can only say that I actually engage in conversation. I don't deflect and I don't just jump into a conversation saying someone is dumb. We had a conversation a few months ago about not engaging people and not generalizing, I hate to say it but you are doing both again.

 

[Doc1]

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

Hey Comey isn't the head of the FBI anymore. And if you think I believe Trump and the Republicans would not JUMP at the chance to get Clinton indicted if they could make it stick, you must think I'm the dumbest member of USMB.

Actually not the DUMBEST but in the running.

Well Doc, I can only say that I actually engage in conversation. I don't deflect and I don't just jump into a conversation saying someone is dumb. We had a conversation a few months ago about not engaging people and not generalizing, I hate to say it but you are doing both again.

LOL, you are nothing but a partisan hack....that's ok but you can NEVER be taken seriously.

 

[forkup]

What are those holes?

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

Right, because she only remembered the important stuff like how many beers she drank.

And thanks for bringing up that other hole--she was waiting for them to come to her. They offered to come to her long before they laid the deadline. Now if you're going to tell me she didn't know that they made the offer--her lawyers didn't know they made the offer, she never watched the media or read the newspapers to know they made the offer, then you must think I'm the dumbest member on USMB.

-In the scheme of things how important is it for me remembering the mess the ambulance people left on the floor after they were done? I'll ask you honestly to think back on something traumatic in your life and try to remember. You will find that you remember the most important things and probably a few inane details just like Ford.
-At best it's not so much a hole as proof that she wanted to stop Kavanaugh from being nominated. She readily admits to that.

I did, and I remember the address! And I know the dude was arrested! Actual trauma leaves prints in the brain. Mine was 45 years ago. I remember like it was yesterday! You know what I can’t remember? His name or what he looks like. I called the cops who took him away, and no records

That's my point. I remember some things vividly and other things have just faded. Ray is claiming that because the recollection is spotty that means it's untrue. I'm saying that if something traumatic happens there is no telling what will imprint and what won't.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In spite of all those things, Hillary still ran for President--while under FBI investigation. And who knows, she may still run again, and you will vote for her again. For crying out loud, the woman was so drunk she couldn't complete a 911 dedication. She couldn't even make it back to her van without passing out.

If Kavansugh doesn't get this job and goes to the private sector, and was refused a job because somebody accused him of something, he'd be able to sue that company into the next generation.

-Yes, she ran for public office. Just as Kavanaugh is now. I see you are smart enough to NOT try to deny that the courtesy you are now asking for Kavanaugh is not one you granted Clinton or Obama.
- As to the rest. I don't think you can sue a company for not hiring someone who they have reason to believe committed sexual assault. You could possibly have a libel suit against the person that accuses you. But the company is free to reject you on the basis of not liking the way you dress, let alone suspected sexual assault.

Then you better guess again. Your past employer cannot even say anything negative about you other than proven facts. If he or she does, you could sue them.

Nobody other than the voters tried to stop Hillary from taking the job of President. She had an illegal unsecured server, had classified and confidential information on it that the Chinese now have. She paid for the research of Trump that her FBI used against him and his team.

You see, these are called facts.

Also a fact, the FBI director himself said that no prosecutor would pursue this. Something that events have born out. And despite no prosecution you still assume she was guilty of a crime. As to the FBI, first the opposition paper was first commissioned by someone of the GOP. The FBI is OBLIGATED to pursue a case were someone might be compromised by a foreign power.

Oh please, Comey was just as much on her team than anybody. Can you name one other time an FBI director told the AG how to do her job? That's not what the FBI does. The FBI investigates and hands the results to the AG--not tell her what to do with it.

Somebody had to get Lynch off the hook. There was no way not to proceed with charges against Hillary with those results. Or do you find it just a coincidence that Lynch said she would do whatever the FBI suggested well ahead of time? Like I said, it's never been done before, so HTF would she know the director was going to make such a recommendation in the first place?

Hey Comey isn't the head of the FBI anymore. And if you think I believe Trump and the Republicans would not JUMP at the chance to get Clinton indicted if they could make it stick, you must think I'm the dumbest member of USMB.

Hey, you brought up Comey first--not me. We were discussing when she was running for President.

I'm sure the Republicans would go after Hillary if they could, but it's bad optics. It's not good before any election. It's old news and the voters would turn against Trump and the Republicans like the voters will likely turn against the Democrats now.

 

[Doc1]

For one, she said she couldn't make it on Monday because she's afraid to fly. When she testified, she testified that not only did she fly there, but she's flown all over the place. The woman has had a passport for many years. So why did she say she was afraid of flying? Because the goal is to stall this all long as possible.

She said she had three witnesses; one of them who is considered a lifelong friend. All three said she was FOS.

She said while going to the bathroom, one of the two pushed her into a bedroom, and Judge turned up the music to drown out her screaming. Who plays music in an empty bedroom while hosting a party?

She said there were four other people at this party. She changed that to four people and some girls.

She can't remember who hosted the party, but explicitly remembers she only had one beer?

She ran into Judge after the supposed attack. Instead of turning around and walking out the door, she approached him. She said he was less than friendly to her. WTF is sexually attacked, almost raped, and approaches one of their attackers and tries to make friends with him?

-No, when she testified she said she was hoping to avoid flying by having the committee come to her. The motive you put on her is the exact thing you accuse you Democrats of. You ASSUME guilt.
-Do you remember every party you attended in your life? I sure as hell don't. The only thing the other people claim, in a letter by the way is that they don't remember this party. Perfectly understandable if nothing happened to them in that particular party. I don't count Judge, since he would be admitting to being an accessory to a crime.
- The rest seems perfectly consistent as to memory works in traumatic circumstances. For instance I remember vividly the day my mother died 21 years ago. I remember were I was when I was made aware of it. I remember trying to resuscitate her. I remember the feeling of panic. I remember lots of details. I don't remember the date, what day it was, what I had for lunch, the face of the doctor, how many people were there. I remember vividly our living room floor covered whith wraps of needles. This is how memory works. That day stood out to me in my life and I don't remember ANY days of when I was 17 but that one. But the memory of that day is full of holes.

.

Right, because she only remembered the important stuff like how many beers she drank.

And thanks for bringing up that other hole--she was waiting for them to come to her. They offered to come to her long before they laid the deadline. Now if you're going to tell me she didn't know that they made the offer--her lawyers didn't know they made the offer, she never watched the media or read the newspapers to know they made the offer, then you must think I'm the dumbest member on USMB.

-In the scheme of things how important is it for me remembering the mess the ambulance people left on the floor after they were done? I'll ask you honestly to think back on something traumatic in your life and try to remember. You will find that you remember the most important things and probably a few inane details just like Ford.
-At best it's not so much a hole as proof that she wanted to stop Kavanaugh from being nominated. She readily admits to that.

I did, and I remember the address! And I know the dude was arrested! Actual trauma leaves prints in the brain. Mine was 45 years ago. I remember like it was yesterday! You know what I can’t remember? His name or what he looks like. I called the cops who took him away, and no records

That's my point. I remember some things vividly and other things have just faded. Ray is claiming that because the recollection is spotty that means it's untrue. I'm saying that if something traumatic happens there is no telling what will imprint and what won't.

Which makes the point that it is to be discounted. Don't be an idiot.