Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck


Burgold

Recommended Posts

Just now, justice98 said:

 

They probably wish she was part of the investigation since they think she's totally full of crap and the FBI would prove it.

I agree that's what they would like.  But her own statements on TV contradicting her initial allegations are enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

Yes. But he responded to me making a distinction between the accusation and a poster who said Ford was raped.  His response was a justification for treating them the same because the alleged actions had a profound affect on Ford's life.

Ahhh, so you are just on a word salad angle.

 

Saying that the effects may be the same is not the same thing as saying "she was raped by Kavanaugh." I do not know if they have or do not have the same effects because I have never been in that situation, but if she is afraid of being in closed spaces then you can at least say that the experience had an adverse effect on her life. I feel that is all Burgold said. He never called Kavanaugh a rapist.

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Good?

 

I'd rather the GOP continue to turtle on these accusations than evolve. It will help root out the decaying trash within.

 

I say that sarcastically but I also really do hope the GOP evolves on these issues. Frankly I'm tired of victim blaming and the false persecution complex that the white male dominated GOP has adopted.

 

GOP white males are anything other than victims as the are the most privileged humans on Earth. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

I can't imagine what it's like to continually use some of these far right fringe news sites as my go to for proof. Is Free Republic not good enough for you guys anymore? How about 4chan. I at least recognize those two groups of assholes.

 

He's trying so hard to change the narrative but he is showing that he doesn't have much of anything to fall back on when it comes to his defense of BK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

He's trying so hard to change the narrative but he is showing that he doesn't have much of anything to fall back on when it comes to his defense of BK. 

 

Discrediting the accusers will be enough. 

 

I have other reasons I don’t want him confirmed, but that will be enough for the people that matter. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was listening to some analysis of the prosecutor's questioning of BK.  So it looks like she was originally hired to question both Ford & BK, however once she started zeroing in and focusing on the July 1st date on his calendar which could have possibly corroborated Ford's testimony when she said "a small gathering at a house that I know at least 4 boys attended" (paraphrasing).  As soon as the prosecutor was targeting that, she was never heard from again.  That is when they took a break and Graham went on his unhinged diatribe.   It was also mentioned that Graham was a prosecutor in the air force (or maybe army?) so he would have an understanding of how these kinds of things work when it comes to questioning and trying to get to something specific that might corroborate information from another witness, so his rant was tactical, it was designed to break the ice and wash away what the prosecutor was beginning to get to. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Was listening to some analysis of the prosecutor's questioning of BK.  So it looks like she was originally hired to question both Ford & BK, however once she started zeroing in and focusing on the July 1st date on his calendar which could have possibly corroborated Ford's testimony when she said "a small gathering at a house that I know at least 4 boys attended" (paraphrasing).  

 

ive been wondering about the july 1 date too and why there hasnt been anything about it. 

 

i just saw an interview with a childhood friend of BKs. he said the july 1 get together at timmys house was a house in rockville that was 11 miles away and it was a townhouse. not sure if its true, but take it for what its worth. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So once again, the President is lying? Or the FBI is misinformed about their "free reign to interview who is necessary?"  Can't be both.

 

 

5 minutes ago, grego said:

 

ive been wondering about the july 1 date too and why there hasnt been anything about it. 

 

i just saw an interview with a childhood friend of BKs. he said the july 1 get together at timmys house was a house in rockville that was 11 miles away and it was a townhouse. not sure if its true, but take it for what its worth. 

 

 

 I am no expert, but that would be some kind of remarkable memory to remember a seemingly random get together of four friends. 

 

Edited by NoCalMike
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

So once again, the President is lying? Or the FBI is misinformed about their "free reign to interview who is necessary?"  Can't be both.

 

 

 

 I am no expert, but that would be some kind of remarkable memory to remember a seemingly random get together of four friends. 

 

 

i think he was saying that he knew who timmy was and where he lived, not necessarily the get together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Connie Chung in WaPo speaks out about being sexually assaulted: "I am writing to you because I know that exact dates, exact years are insignificant. We remember exactly what happened to us and who did it to us. We remember the truth forever."https://wapo.st/2yf4WrQ

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/18/opinion/i-was-certain-but-i-was-wrong.html

 

During my ordeal, some of my determination took an urgent new direction. I studied every single detail on the rapist's face. I looked at his hairline; I looked for scars, for tattoos, for anything that would help me identify him. When and if I survived the attack, I was going to make sure that he was put in prison and he was going to rot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-changing-memories-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/

 

Investigators also spoke with former classmates of Kavanaugh, including two men who showed staffers the “party houses” near the country club during the relevant time period. And the detailed description of the home interior Ford originally provided allowed investigators to compare her story to the layout of the homes of the individuals Ford identified. But then Ford changed her description of the house’s floor plan. 

Since media leaks of Ford’s charges first broke, Kavanaugh and his supporters have stressed the impossibility of proving the negative: Kavanaugh could not prove he did not attack Ford. But Kavanaugh could prove that Ford’s story could not possibly have happened by showing that none of the individuals at the supposed party lived in a house near the country club, and that none of their houses matched that described by Ford.  Kavanaugh and investigators were poised to do so when Ford changed her story.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

More trash from the same woman that claimed Dr. Ford hypnotized herself. You sure are desperate these days. 

 

the participants in the study were taught self hypnosis. not sure about blasey ford. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to re-iterate, a lot of people using the "innocent until proven guilty" narrative for this seem to not understand this isn't a criminal trial.  This, just like any other job interview is going to have those asking the questions using their judgement based on the things you say (and in this case others) and come to the best conclusion they can.   You don't need to think BK could be prosecuted criminally in order to come to the conclusion that there is enough smoke there that it isn't worth taking the chance on giving the guy a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the world.    Based solely on the way he acted during the hearing, I'd be worried about him sitting on the court. 

 

I also was reading some of the documents from when he was on Ken Starr's team going after Clinton. He was particularly cunning and vicious in his pursuit.  Giving directions to not allow Clinton any breaks to collect thoughts (this one is particularly disturbing because during his testimony he got obviously flustered abut the drinking questions and lashed out at the Senator asking her about her drinking, then he got a break to collect his thoughts, likely realized how he came off, came back and apologized), instructing to ask the most sexually explicit questions possible in order to try and catch him in a lie.


The guy is a real piece of work, regardless of all that is going on.

Edited by NoCalMike
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...