Kavanaugh Vote Now in Jeopardy
- Thread starter DaShuckster
- Start date
- Status
He seemed like a guy thats pissed about his name being drug through the mud for the sake of political gamesmanship. Every one of us would have been that worked up if the allegations werent true. If they WERE true, he would have been much more measured and tactical.
I think he was much more honest than she was. I did not buy the little school girl voice, she was caught in multiple lies about her polygraph, fear of flying and her how she got to a party six miles away even though she was not old enough to drive.
You don't think Kavanaugh has ever drank to the point of passing out or memory loss?
He’s catholic. It’s pratically a prerequisite for members of our tribe to get blackout drunk from time to time.
Im married to a Catholic so I can verify this, lol.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
ok. Well everyone else says he has and that he's a sloppy drunk including people who knew him in high school and college. People who drank with him. His best friend in high school wrote a book about his wild party lifestyle including a character named Bart O'Kavanaugh. He boasted about drinking 100 kegs in a single year. He got named "Beach Week Ralph Champ" by his friends after throwing up the most from the parties in that week.That sound like someone who's never passed out?
That sound like someone who's never passed out?
Oh. So we are supposed to believe what others say and disregard the personal testimony of the accuser/accused.
You're so quick to slurp down incredibly unlikely statements as fact when they support what you hope to be true. Funny how that works. Maybe, just maybe, you're not being honest with yourself.
Says the guy who immediately believes anything that is consistent with his confirmation bias.
"I choose to believe the 1 man who has everything to gain over the dozens of people who have nothing to gain because that's what I want to be true"
- @Crazyhole (basically)
- @Crazyhole (basically)
I mean the dozens who have said they were around Kavanaugh when he got sloppy drunk.
Being a sloppy drunk doesnt equate to blacking out.
But again, i have to ask why the senate dems didnt ask a single question about the event?
How about this email from kavanaugh to his friends where he says he doesn't remember getting aggressive after losing a game of dice. Is that enough for you to maybe conced that he may have had memory problems after drinking?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kavanaugh-emails_us_5b917067e4b0162f472b242e
You're confusing those who don't want to come out about a 'directly recalled' sexual assault with someone who had a memory they couldn't remember for 30 years until 2012 -- and not Kavanaugh's name until 2016 or 2017. Until you recognize that, and #metoo differentiates that reality from 'directly recalled' memory victims, you will keep thinking they are the same.
They are not, and any psychologist will point that out.
I honestly believe Ms. Ford believes what she believes. And if she didn't name people who are non-collaborating, it would be far more easy to say this latent memory could be attributed to Mr. Kavanaugh.
But because Ms. Ford gave names of witnesses who refuse to not only collaborate her story, but have also given sworn statements that counter it completely on there being any party and no associations whatsoever during the period, that brings her latent -- not 'recalled' -- her memories into serious doubt.
As long as people keep ignoring all those facts, and only referencing the ones they want to believe -- including the US media continually mis-appropriating the 2013-2017 collaborations as the 1982 ones -- they will clash with those who are recognizing all the facts.
I'm sorry, but one should be objective and recognize all facts. There is serious doubt here. Stop treating this as a simple rape case where the woman 100% recalls from the period what happened.
So he's guilty, he?
And via Judge he is definitely guilty-by-association.
And high school laundry also applies.
The US media did its job.
Fair enough. Not sure what the context of the conversation is so I can't really comment on it but why wouldn't it have been brought up specifically yesterday?
As well as the sworn statements of those the Accuser named in 1982, who do not collaborate, and even question there was even a party and the attendees. That's where this really brings the Accuser into question ... because her memories are not directly recalled, but were latent, and only drawn out in 2012+.
He lied to the Senate yesterday under oath about small stuff.
Devils triangle? Please. It's never been mentioned as a drinking game in the history of the internet. Reporters talking to high school classmates of his say it wasn't a drinking game. It's commonly known as a threesome with 2M1F. I wish a senator would have grilled him on the rules.
Meet Jennifer Thompson. Read the story. Google and watch her powerful videos.
She reported her rape shortly after it happened, not 30+ years later. She made a point to memorize every detail of her attacker. She was absolutely sure days later, weeks later, years later. She was not lying; but she was wrong. This happens more often than we'd like to think. The "believe everything" attitude that is being adopted by so much of our culture is wrong; not just for the accused but for the accuser as well. It was not good for Jennifer Thompson to put an innocent man in jail and it was not good for society to have the actual rapist still in society.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/545
In fairness to Dr. Ford, I can understand why they did. The last thing we all want -- and this is everyone now -- is to have the Accuser be scrutinized for things that have nothing to do with her claims.
Now if they just applied the same to the Accused, Judge Kavanaugh. The US media really did a number on him. The 'final straw' for me was the 'high school laundry.' Everyone has it, men ... and women. But apparently in the NWO, only men are targets.
We've gone from undermining women in the 20th century -- even Hillary Clinton undermining them -- to completely undermining men, even as men are now holding men accountable to an extreme on any and all new, potential inebriation.
The FFFFFFourth of July was confirmed by highschool classmates and his statements on "devil's triangle" and "boofed" were refuted as lies.
Imagine a friend of yours raping you. The next day you're going to know who did it. The day after you're going to know their name. The week after you're going to know their name months later you'll know their name.
It's different if you're piecing a story together and you don't have info. If you know who the person is on day 1 that name won't change to someone else.
Some people are saying she was on some kind of anti-anxiety medication. I don't know if I buy it but looking back I can see where they can make that judgement. Especially when she said that she was having trouble following the questions.
More bullsh*t. Ford's memory of the event was permanently seared in her brain from the moment it happened. She didn't have to 'piece together' any portion of it.
What she did try to reconstruct were things associated with it (the address, the date, etc.) She didn't misremember how it happened or who did it.
But keeping it to herself for decades will probably mean that this a-hole Kavanaugh will get away with it.
Speaking of Kavanaugh, the old adage you can tell a lot about a man when he's under stress was certainly true yesterday with his performance. The very notion that this guys will be review cases in an objective, nonpartisan way is ludicrous given his dickishness yesterday.
Let's recap:
Brett Kavanaugh was part of a serial gang rape society that "everyone knew about" for years and years, and yet no one spoke a peep about any of this "serial gang raping" for more than 37 years. Not a single corroboration from the time of these "serial gang rapes" can be found in the same decade as when this allegedly happened.
Not a single person can corroborate Ford's allegation from the same decade that it allegedly occurred. There were 4 people there, then there were more, then it was only BK in the room, then it was him + Judge.
In other words, this is utter insanity and exactly what Democrats want. Force this into a faux MeToo movement where BK is presumed guilty and must prove his "innocence" in a manner in which it's utterly impossible. We have one single allegation from 37 years ago that can be corroborated by no one that is remotely relevant to the allegation.
Again- DIANE FEINSTEIN KNEW THIS. She knew this allegation wouldn't pass the smell test - which is why she pathetically held it until the last second to spring it as a mechanism to either delay the vote past the Midterms, or get enough shit to stick to BK over this that Trump pulls his nomination.
This is politics at its' absolute worst. Our Senate has been turned into a disgrace.
Brett Kavanaugh was part of a serial gang rape society that "everyone knew about" for years and years, and yet no one spoke a peep about any of this "serial gang raping" for more than 37 years. Not a single corroboration from the time of these "serial gang rapes" can be found in the same decade as when this allegedly happened.
Not a single person can corroborate Ford's allegation from the same decade that it allegedly occurred. There were 4 people there, then there were more, then it was only BK in the room, then it was him + Judge.
In other words, this is utter insanity and exactly what Democrats want. Force this into a faux MeToo movement where BK is presumed guilty and must prove his "innocence" in a manner in which it's utterly impossible. We have one single allegation from 37 years ago that can be corroborated by no one that is remotely relevant to the allegation.
Again- DIANE FEINSTEIN KNEW THIS. She knew this allegation wouldn't pass the smell test - which is why she pathetically held it until the last second to spring it as a mechanism to either delay the vote past the Midterms, or get enough shit to stick to BK over this that Trump pulls his nomination.
This is politics at its' absolute worst. Our Senate has been turned into a disgrace.
Some 70 - 80% of women who are sexually assaulted are familiar with their assailant. It's those women who already have a familiarity that can be believed.
The problem is the other 20 - 30% that do not know the assailant. And this is where these issues come into play, especially years later -- let alone decades later -- and definitely in the case where the memory is 'latent' and not 'recalled.'
This is the problem with everyone saying 'women should be believed by default.' If the alleged is already familiar to the victim, it definitely does come down to the simple, "Why would she lie?"
But if the victim had no prior relationship or knowledge of the alleged, then it's not the same. Eye witness accounts are always going to be questionable when it is a matter of thousand and thousands of random people. DNA also has the same problem, as the 13 markers allowed to be recorded are not unique, unlike fingerprints, and becomes a 1 in hundreds.
That's why the combination of things ...
- Eyewitness (even if just 1 person)
- Date-time-location (very important), combined with ...
- DNA (1 in hundreds -- with the other 2)
This is why when Ms. Ford named her witnesses from 1982, and none of those witnesses would collaborate her story, and the closest one to her -- another woman -- even said she didn't know Mr. Kavanaugh until years later ... it brings a serious amount of doubt to Ms. Ford's latent memory that cannot be ignored.
That's why both Ms. Ford and Mr. Kavanaugh can be telling the truth. I'm sorry if people think this is as simple as he v. she said, and that the woman should be believed by default, and wouldn't be lying. I actually don't think she's lying.
I just have to recognize ...
- TShe had a latent memory that didn't surface until 2012+, under professional care
- Those who collaborated her statement were all 2013-2017, and didn't name Kavanaugh in their sworn statements
- Those who didn't collaborate her statements that she named from 1982 cannot be ignored, especially the friend who gave a sworn statement that said she didn't know Kavanaugh then
OH WOW! You mean to tell me that someone may be nervous when being labeled as a sexual predator by insane Democratic Senators who vowed to destroy BK the second he was nominated?
OMG HE'S GUILTY!!!
And that's the thing about the "FBI Investigation," DiFi should have called for the investigation on the day she got the letter. If not then, then she should've shared it with the committee and they would've turned it over and they could've requested an investigation then. You can't be mad at "Republicans" and not have a greater anger at DiFi.
Remember- before BK was even nominated, the entire left wing of the Democratic base was yelling at the top of their lungs to do ANYTHING to stop whoever was nominated. They knew the D's didn't have the votes in normal procedure but they were demanding that these people pull out any stop to defeat whoever was nominated.
When I heard the "boofed" thing described as flatulence, I rolled my eyes so far back into my head I saw my brain. Boofed is a another way of saying butt fvcked if I remember correctly.
Either way, it doesn't matter. Kavanaugh was screwed the day he was nominated. Whether he was lying or telling the truth, he was going to get hammered by all those holier-than-thou democrat Senators who have never made a mistake or done immature high school things, ever.
I call it being defensive, not a dick. If you were getting grilled like he was, you can't tell me that it wouldn't have pissed you off at all. When you're 50+ years old, getting grilled and judged by sanctimonious 50+ year old dipsh!ts, over crap you did in high school, you're going to get pissed. I don't care who you are.
I'd hope a Supreme Court justice would be able to keep a level head.
Who gives a sh!t? High school and college were made for that kind of fun. He should have never been questioned about it in the first place. The only bad part about it is that he tried to mislead the asshat hypocritical senators - Kavanaugh shouldn't have even been dignified those blatantly biased character assassinating questions with an answer. He should have said, "Fvck you. You can only ask me those questions if you've never done anything improper in your life."
That sound like someone who's never passed out?
Every single one of those senators that turned the hearing into a circus should be removed from office.
- Status
Similar threads
