So here's what I think happened between Kavanaugh & Ford

[The Purge]

[Q]

Can any of these men you know essplain how the **** Harvey Weinstein works into this?

Isn't Weinstein the big Democrat Party fund raiser who has dozens of women claiming that he sexually assaulted him?

The Moon Bat asshole that would spend one day enriching the coffers of Democrats and the next day assaulting young Hollywood starlets?

Not only did Crooked Hillary attack the women that exposed Slick Willy sexually assaulting them but she yucked it up with one of the biggest sexual predators in the world.

This guy?

I neither know, nor care, who the **** Harvey Weinstein is. Never heard of him until about a year ago.

My question was, is now, and ever shall be, what the **** he has to do with this issue. That question remains unaddressed.

You know how to keep an idiot leftist in suspense......

 

[Pogo]

The intent always was to have the allegation as vague and unspecific as possible. By doing so and then screaming as loud as possible they avoided the pitfall of anything specific which he could easily prove is a lie.

If they named a specific address, there was always the possibility that it could be proven that the house was vacant at that time or owned by an elderly couple with no kids.

If a specific date was used, they didn't know what Kavanaugh's real schedule was and what if he had been in another state, country or whatever?

If she named who had brought her to the party or how she had gotten home with and with whom, what if they popped up and said, hey, I never hung out with those kids, or I hadn't moved to that area until a year later.

MUCH better to keep all the allegations as vague as possible and let the Progressive lemmings do their thing.

It's the way Dims do things. Scream and rant but never, ever, be specific.

You mean the way wags like WillHaftawaite are bending over backward to deflect away the very specific date of July 1st 1982 with the very specific names that match those in Ford's testimony?

bummer,

pogo is whining about me wanting proof that July 1 is the day everything changed.

I don't really care what you want. I just lead you to the water; it's your job to point to the water and declare it doesn't exist.

By the way my name, like all proper names, begins with an uppercase letter in English.

Tell us, omnipotent one..'

Was July 1st the ONLY time that summer that group of boys got together?

Phuktiphano. And I seriously doubt it but then nobody made such a claim. Nor did anyone claim "omnipotence". You seem to have pulled that out of your ass as well.

Were there ANY girls at the gettogether on July 1st?
(doesnt' seem to be any listed on his calendar)

Again, unknown. Once AGAIN ---- this is HIS calendar, not EVERYBODY's calendar.

Perhaps you'd like to essplain to the class how some private home had a security guard at the door with a list on a clipboard declaring "sorry, if you're not on Brett Kavanaugh's date calendar you can't come in". That's not the way Earth works. You can't "plan" who ELSE is going to show up at some place you planned to go. Also, here on Earth, the idea of a party or social gathering kind of has a lot to do with NOT knowing who else will be there. Otherwise you'd be hanging with the same people over and over and over and over. BOR-ing.

Amazing the depths the self-delusionists will sink to to preserve their own delusions. Truly stupefying....

July 1st... date is midsummer.

Ford has no idea WHEN it happened.

Could it have been BEFORE, possibly AFTER, that date?

Sure.

Again --- if you have a another date that fits the Ford scenario, maybe one that Rachel Mitchell didn't notice or didn't have time to cover ---- bring it on. Ain't nobody holding you back.

(do you have OCD)

No. Do you?

After all you've expended an awful lot of energy pretending not to understand a simple point here.

(BTW, as far as the smilies, I have a tendency to laugh at clowns. Want me to stop them, stop being a clown)

Like what?

I do make a lot of jokes. I believe in humor where appropriate. I haven't found appropriate openings here. It's just instructive that you have. Most instructive indeed.

 

[Pogo]

/----/ Who the hell said it was a beach party? Are you insane?

Yeah I guess we've lead very different lives. Where I grew up, wearing a swim suit under one's clothes if you were going swimming later on or to the beach was pretty common.

/—-/ Where the hell was this party? I mean exact location from the nearest beach? BTW I have lived within a half hour drive of the beach my entire life and never did that. My wife and daughters would wear a cover up over their swimsuits. Geeeze talk about grasping at straws.

I've seen it, but it is something I've seen done, when the people are going to the beach. They take off their clothes at the beach and are ready to swim.


To do that, when going to a frat party? Very strange.

/----/ Who the hell said it was a beach party? Are you insane?

Yeah I guess we've lead very different lives. Where I grew up, wearing a swim suit under one's clothes if you were going swimming later on or to the beach was pretty common.

/—-/ Where the hell was this party? I mean exact location from the nearest beach? BTW I have lived within a half hour drive of the beach my entire life and never did that. My wife and daughters would wear a cover up over their swimsuits. Geeeze talk about grasping at straws.

See ---- this is why I refrain from jumping into an issue before I know what it's about. A week ago for example I was nowhere near any of this. But I happened to take a road trip on the same day the hearing was going on and it started the same time I got on the road so it became my soundtrack and I followed the entire thing.

The woman has already described how she had spent the day swimming and diving, apparently that's what she was into at that age. That's why she had a swimsuit on. Obviously she threw on some clothes over that after drying off and stopped by this house party. All of that was explained.

/—-/ Who the hell puts dry clothes on over a wet bathing suit except you? Your grasping at straws is comical

/—-/ Who the hell said anybody did that?

You put your clothes on AFTER you've dried off -------- as it SAYS RIGHT THERE IN MY POST (learn to read).

 

[Pogo]

It is blatantly obvious that nothing happen between them. She didn't even hang in the same social circles as Kavanaugh. She is lying big time.

She was simply somebody that the Democrats found that was willing to lie about Kavanaugh. They needed to go back to high school because then it would be hard to prove that it never happen. He had too stellar of a reputation as an adult for the filthy Democrats to ever hang anything on him like a public hair in coke can or something.

She is a card carrying Moon Bat from a family of Moon Bats. Perfect lying ***** for the Democrats.

There is no evidence that she is "lying",
Similarly there is also no evidence that he is "lying".

There is however evidence that he would often get into situations of deep inebriation on "skis" to the point where he couldn't remember what had happened. In fact there is indication he still does. So it's entirely possible that when he says it never happened he is honestly relating what is in his memory.

--- which would mean nobody is "lying". As far as they know.

Well said, and I agree. Still, are you willing to see a man's life destroyed based on zero evidence? If that is what our Country has devolved to, we are in a sad state.

It is not even a question of giving the benefit of the doubt to the accused in a "he said/she said" situation.

It is a question of letting the filthy Democrats get away with a despicable campaign to gain by dishonesty what they were unable to gain at the ballot box.

There is absolutely no doubt she is lying.

The invitation remains WIDE OPEN to prove that.

Fingerboy can't do it. He runs away given the invitation.
Correll can't do it.

In fact nobody can do it. It involves proving a negative.

You can't prove a negative. Don't believe me? Ask Clarence Thomas.

Good luck. Prove a negative, win a prize.

The reason the filthy ass Democrats got the Ford ***** to lie is because they had to find somebody that knew Kav decades and decades ago. With his stellar record as an adult they sure as hell could not come up with a "public hair on Coke can" now.

They looked for a Liberal asshole that was willing to conjure up some blatantly false story that happen back when Ronald Reagan was President. Something that couldn't be proven but that the filthy Liberals would use to waylay the nomination.

The majority Republicans should have told told the filthy Democrats to shove their lies where the sun don't shine but as usual there are some weak minded RINOs that side with the destructive agenda of the Democrat and that is the only reason Kavanaugh has not been already confirmed.

As Graham so forcefully said the other day we have seen the Democrat politics of destruction big time and it is despicable.

There is absolutely no truth in anything that asshole lying Libtard ***** Ford said.

If it did happen then she need to come up with a lot more proof than this silly ass "I remember it". That dog don't hunt.

Cool story bruh.

Same thing --- PROVE that.

 

[Auld Phart]

Phuktiphano.

Obviously

By the way my name, like all proper names, begins with an uppercase letter in English.

I'll try to remember that, pogo

After all you've expended an awful lot of energy pretending not to understand a simple point here.

You seem to have a problem not realizing you could be wrong.

(seems to be standard with you)

don't really care what you want.

dont' care

Again, unknown. Once AGAIN ---- this is HIS calendar, not EVERYBODY's calendar.

and you've seen all the entries on that calendar?

No other dates listing Mark Judge? the other guys?

Odd, when I was in school, we pretty much had a certain group of friends we hung with. Seems odd this was the one and only time they got together that whole summer

Amazing the depths the self-delusionists will sink to to preserve their own delusions. Truly stupefying....

I agree, especially after reading YOUR posts

Again --- if you have a another date that fits the Ford scenario, maybe one that Rachel Mitchell didn't notice or didn't have time to cover ---- bring it on. Ain't nobody holding you back.

see above

I haven't found appropriate openings here.

YOU should read your own posts.

I've found many reasons to laugh, after reading them

 

[Dragonlady]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have ******* known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

Your synopsis may not be too far off, but you're overlooking strong details, like they locked the door and turned up the music. When she tried to yell, he put her hand over her mouth.

I also agree that her experience of being terrorized may not have registered on these young assholes, but rest assured I vividly remember the details of my "close calls" to this day because the relialization that you are in a bad spot and could end up raped or dead tends to sear these details into your mind and focuses your mind like nothing else. Some details will elude you because your #1 primary focus is looking for a way to get away.

 

[Mac1958]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have ******* known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

Your synopsis may not be too far off, but you're overlooking strong details, like they locked the door and turned up the music. When she tried to yell, he put her hand over her mouth.

I also agree that her experience of being terrorized may not have registered on these young assholes, but rest assured I vividly remember the details of my "close calls" to this day because the relialization that you are in a bad spot and could end up raped or dead tends to sear these details into your mind and focuses your mind like nothing else. Some details will elude you because your #1 primary focus is looking for a way to get away.

Yeah, can't argue with any of that. Just looking for a theory outside of the standard all-or-nothing partisan assumptions.
.

 

[Dragonlady]

Maybe

But I think it was more than just a dry hump for fun

He tried to remove her clothes but she had a bathing suit on underneath and he gave up

Prove it, asshole.

AM I THE ONLY ONE who has noticed the ring around Chrissy's throat?

View attachment 219298

What is that?

1. Residual marks left from her B&D sex collar removed for the hearing?
2. Deliberately put there to subliminally make her appear more the "victim?"
3. Leftover choke marks from her husband after pleading with the psycho liberal ***** not to go through with this crap failed?

I want this to end up with Brett on the Supreme Court, Feinstein impeached and Chrissy Ford counter-sued for one million dollars.

You piece of Russian shit!!! Your entire post is shit you made up.

That picture of Dr. Ford is so photoshopped that even a blind person could see it.

 

[Pogo]

You have entries for July 14th, July 23rd or August 11th that include not only Judge and PJ but "skis"?

Don't need them, but no doubt they are on his calendar.

said meet at timmy's?

There ya go.

Now Ford has a place and time.

Just find timmy, and find out if Ford was there.​

I agree that's a clue as to the setting, and I believe in the video he gave Timmy's last name as well. If I'm the FBI that's on the top of my to-do list. There may be several leads to follow but that's in the forefront. Which is --- AGAIN --- the point of bringing up July 1st.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".
​

You have an explanation for why Rachel Mitchell was suddenly usurped after that point in favor of Graham and the Hissyfit Brigade?

Seems to me Graham got fed up with the total bullshit coming from the left, and decided to read them the riot act.

the rest followed, making Mitchells questions irrevelant

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

You don't have an answer. Actually you do, and it's the same answer I have. You just can't admit to it.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".

Because it IS funny.

You're basing your entire argument on a date likely picked at random, because it was mid-summer, and listed the names of several of his friends, Mitchell picked it, and the senators parroted it, thinking, like you, something actually happened that day.

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

Because Graham had had enough.

That seems pretty obvious.



Now, send all your investigative work to the FBI, tell them to locate timmy and the boys, and find out if Ford was there July 1st

(you could get a Gold Star, instead of a funny)

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

if the FBI gets in Timmy's old house and it has not been remodeled, or gets old pictures of it, and the layout matches her drawing, that is corroboration, the 3 men that she mentioned at the party, on the K calendar that summer day, is also corroboration, now that they have a date, they can try to get the member log ins for those who were at the country club pool that day, july 1st, 1982 and if she was there that would corroborate her story as well.....


they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

they can confirm whether he was a heavy drinker... what he was like when he drank?

there are many things that can end up corroborating her story...

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

Exactly how did she get out if she was LOCKED IN? Every bedroom I've seen with locks, is locked from the inside.

Correct. Everyone was inside and while in there one of them locked it. Then when she got free from under Kavanaugh on the bed, she ----- STILL BEING ON THE INSIDE ---- would have had equal ability to UNlock it, and so escape.

This isn't complex. Really it isn't. When you lock a door from the inside, you also UNlock it from the inside. It's the same knob on the same side of the same door.

Would you like an illustration to understand how this works?

Holey SHIT.....

Really dood? Political partisan hackery has now devolved into pretending not to understand how a freaking DOORKNOB works?

they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

The Aug 7 entry proves he includes girls.

On his own calendar he does. But he does not predict, nor can he, nor could anybody, WHO ELSE might show up as the evening
goes on.

Again ---- NOT ******* ROCKET SURGERY.

You can put 30 friends together and rent a bus to go to Fenway Park. You can even get there with a "three hour drive" if your bus can go 140 miles an hour. And you can enter all that in your calendar. But you ***CANNOT*** list the names of thirty thousand other people who may be at Fenway Park the same day. Because that CANNOT BE PREDICTED.


---- what is it........ something in the water between Oklahoma and Texas? Or what? Is your water imported from Flint?

 

[Pogo]

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

if the FBI gets in Timmy's old house and it has not been remodeled, or gets old pictures of it, and the layout matches her drawing, that is corroboration, the 3 men that she mentioned at the party, on the K calendar that summer day, is also corroboration, now that they have a date, they can try to get the member log ins for those who were at the country club pool that day, july 1st, 1982 and if she was there that would corroborate her story as well.....


they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

they can confirm whether he was a heavy drinker... what he was like when he drank?

there are many things that can end up corroborating her story...

They haven't got shit. "If, if, if." So far all we have is "lie, lie, lie." You're an imbecile.

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

I'd like to see you put on trial before the world accused of some heinous things with vague details and that you did not do and being told you have to prove your innocence.

I bet you'd handle it far worse than Kavanaugh did.

Oh, and today's reading assignment:

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Hate to tell you this but nobody's reading your "assignments". They may be relevant or useful somewhere but they're not applicable to anything here. Again if you have a point, make that point and use your reference to support it. Nobody's going to read through an entire treatise or video to find out what the point is when you could have just posted it and doesn't appear to be relevant anyway.

 

[toobfreak]

Maybe

But I think it was more than just a dry hump for fun

He tried to remove her clothes but she had a bathing suit on underneath and he gave up

Prove it, asshole.

AM I THE ONLY ONE who has noticed the ring around Chrissy's throat?

View attachment 219298

What is that?

1. Residual marks left from her B&D sex collar removed for the hearing?
2. Deliberately put there to subliminally make her appear more the "victim?"
3. Leftover choke marks from her husband after pleading with the psycho liberal ***** not to go through with this crap failed?

I want this to end up with Brett on the Supreme Court, Feinstein impeached and Chrissy Ford counter-sued for one million dollars.

You piece of Russian shit!!! Your entire post is shit you made up.

That picture of Dr. Ford is so photoshopped that even a blind person could see it.

PROVE IT psycho-*****. Show us the original or STFU.

 

[Pogo]

Maybe

But I think it was more than just a dry hump for fun

He tried to remove her clothes but she had a bathing suit on underneath and he gave up

Prove it, asshole.

AM I THE ONLY ONE who has noticed the ring around Chrissy's throat?

View attachment 219298

What is that?

1. Residual marks left from her B&D sex collar removed for the hearing?
2. Deliberately put there to subliminally make her appear more the "victim?"
3. Leftover choke marks from her husband after pleading with the psycho liberal ***** not to go through with this crap failed?

I want this to end up with Brett on the Supreme Court, Feinstein impeached and Chrissy Ford counter-sued for one million dollars.

You piece of Russian shit!!! Your entire post is shit you made up.

That picture of Dr. Ford is so photoshopped that even a blind person could see it.

That's the same klown who took a post of mine and edited 90% of it away so as to completely change its meaning, which he then "addressed" as a strawman. Also the same asshat who posted in the beginning of this thread, literally, "SHE ASKED FOR IT" (those being his all-caps, post 7). Clearly he has a tenuous relationship with Reality.

 

[boedicca]

They haven't got shit. "If, if, if." So far all we have is "lie, lie, lie." You're an imbecile.

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

I'd like to see you put on trial before the world accused of some heinous things with vague details and that you did not do and being told you have to prove your innocence.

I bet you'd handle it far worse than Kavanaugh did.

Oh, and today's reading assignment:

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Hate to tell you this but nobody's reading your "assignments". They may be relevant or useful somewhere but they're not applicable to anything here. Again if you have a point, make that point and use your reference to support it. Nobody's going to read through an entire treatise or video to find out what the point is when you could have just posted it and doesn't appear to be relevant anyway.

I linked to a very good short article on Ritual Defamation. The tactics should be quite familiar to you as you are engaged in the with Kavanaugh.

 

[Pogo]

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

I'd like to see you put on trial before the world accused of some heinous things with vague details and that you did not do and being told you have to prove your innocence.

I bet you'd handle it far worse than Kavanaugh did.

Oh, and today's reading assignment:

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Hate to tell you this but nobody's reading your "assignments". They may be relevant or useful somewhere but they're not applicable to anything here. Again if you have a point, make that point and use your reference to support it. Nobody's going to read through an entire treatise or video to find out what the point is when you could have just posted it and doesn't appear to be relevant anyway.

I linked to a very good short article on Ritual Defamation. The tactics should be quite familiar to you as you are engaged in the with Kavanaugh.

And as you are a trusted, intelligent and honorable source, I will read it.

I just don't expect it will be relevant to anything here.

 

[boedicca]

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

I'd like to see you put on trial before the world accused of some heinous things with vague details and that you did not do and being told you have to prove your innocence.

I bet you'd handle it far worse than Kavanaugh did.

Oh, and today's reading assignment:

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Hate to tell you this but nobody's reading your "assignments". They may be relevant or useful somewhere but they're not applicable to anything here. Again if you have a point, make that point and use your reference to support it. Nobody's going to read through an entire treatise or video to find out what the point is when you could have just posted it and doesn't appear to be relevant anyway.

I linked to a very good short article on Ritual Defamation. The tactics should be quite familiar to you as you are engaged in the with Kavanaugh.

And as you are a trusted, credible and honorable source, I will read it.

I just don't expect it will be relevant to anything here.

No need to seize the last word, friendo.

I'll imagine you tried to say something clever.

 

[toobfreak]

Maybe

But I think it was more than just a dry hump for fun

He tried to remove her clothes but she had a bathing suit on underneath and he gave up

Prove it, asshole.

AM I THE ONLY ONE who has noticed the ring around Chrissy's throat?

View attachment 219298

What is that?

1. Residual marks left from her B&D sex collar removed for the hearing?
2. Deliberately put there to subliminally make her appear more the "victim?"
3. Leftover choke marks from her husband after pleading with the psycho liberal ***** not to go through with this crap failed?

I want this to end up with Brett on the Supreme Court, Feinstein impeached and Chrissy Ford counter-sued for one million dollars.

You piece of Russian shit!!! Your entire post is shit you made up.

That picture of Dr. Ford is so photoshopped that even a blind person could see it.

That's the same klown who took a post of mine and edited 90% of it away so as to completely change its meaning, which he then "addressed" as a strawman. Also the same asshat who posted in the beginning of this thread, literally, "SHE ASKED FOR IT" (those being his all-caps, post 7). Clearly he has a tenuous relationship with Reality.

Still living the fantasy, eh, pogostick? Sore loser, bad winner, mental health still eludes you. But its just fine when you really DO play with my words and try to twist my meaning around to label me something I never said because you stink so bad at making rational arguments.

 

[evenflow1969]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have ******* known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

There is zero evidence that Kavanaugh interacted with Blasy at the party.
There is zero evidence that Kavanaugh was at the party
There is zero evidence that Blasy (Ford) was at the party
There is zero evidence that there was a party

Should we lynch a man on zero evidence? According to the Nazi democrats we should.

He threatens abortion and must be stopped by any means.

No one is lynching any one the guy is being vetted. Dumb ****. When you are in the public eye allegations get made and you must defend. It has never been any different. So quit crying like your ******* baby judge! What a little ***** crying on national TV. He loses his man card over that alone.

No, it's a lynching.

You Nazis failed to derail him during the vetting and pulled up a magic last second "witness" who has been paid a million dollars, to magically derail what you failed to derail earlier.

It's a lynch mob and a disgrace. The fact that you pigs have done this has damaged the confirmation process beyond repair.

Bla bla bla. Keep supporting draft dodgers and people that cry on national TV and call your self a conservative. You like little bitches and birds of a feather flock together!

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I think the OP has a pretty good perspective on what many guys do in their younger years, but...

I really doubt a High School junior and even a senior virgin would have the balls to try force himself on a woman, especially in front of another guy and especially if he was a virgin into his college years.

No virgin would ever have the self-confidence to try to forcibly rape a girl. That kind of behavior only comes from stupid guys who have already had sex with the lights on a dozen times. When I was a virgin it was the girls who had to do all the seducing, and I am now in my 60s (so I lost it at an earlier time than Kavanaugh by over a decade). Even in the 80s guys were not that bold.

No - I really don't think it happened that way.

You're talking about regular guys, guys who irrespective of the circumstances they find themselves in would never violate another person in this manner. Guys who commit sexual assault, even the "minor" infractions like grabbing someone, inappropriate touching or trying to force a unwanted kiss or hug and then think that there is nothing wrong with their behavior or that it's not worthy of them suffering any consequences for it are different. So are their enablers.

 

[Cellblock2429]

I think the OP has a pretty good perspective on what many guys do in their younger years, but...

I really doubt a High School junior and even a senior virgin would have the balls to try force himself on a woman, especially in front of another guy and especially if he was a virgin into his college years.

No virgin would ever have the self-confidence to try to forcibly rape a girl. That kind of behavior only comes from stupid guys who have already had sex with the lights on a dozen times. When I was a virgin it was the girls who had to do all the seducing, and I am now in my 60s (so I lost it at an earlier time than Kavanaugh by over a decade). Even in the 80s guys were not that bold.

No - I really don't think it happened that way.

You're talking about regular guys, guys who irrespective of the circumstances they find themselves in would never violate another person in this manner. Guys who commit sexual assault, even the "minor" infractions like grabbing someone, inappropriate touching or trying to force a unwanted kiss or hug and then think that there is nothing wrong with their behavior or that it's not worthy of them suffering any consequences for it are different. So are their enablers.

/——/ Like Joe Biden?

 

[OKTexas]

Actually I did watch that little clown show, I thought his request the people listening to him suspend common sense and go along with his fantasy was classic propaganda. (I'm paraphrasing of course). Then he tried to explain away why there were no females listed, I thought that little fantasy was cute. Of course they weren't listed because none were there.

.

Go look at the successful case % for Senator Whitehouse as a prosecutor.

You people are so full of shit you don't even know when the prison door has been slammed & locked on your poor asses.

Nuthouse's prosecution record is irrelevant, by the end of next week we're going to be at the same place we were yesterday. And Nuthouse will hold his usual 1% of the senate vote. He will still be crying in his beer when Kavanaugh is confirmed.

Actually we haven't even established whether Sheldon Whitehouse likes beer.

Brett Kavanaugh actually asked him that question.

Let's reiterate that in a separate line. In a judiciary hearing for a SCOTUS position, the candidate asked a Senator on the committee what kind of beer he likes. The Senator did not answer.

It didn't matter and if the FBI comes back and says Kavanaugh is Jesus incarnate with the wisdom of God himself, Nuthouse still wouldn't vote for him.

.

The 'process' is NOT ALL about a vote; idiot

Of course it is, he will get a confirmation vote or he won't. 45-46 of the 49 commies won't vote for him no matter what, the was put out day one. Everything is just a side show.

.