WestCanMan

Agreed, 100%. I'd actually call it a "several decades after the fact attempted rape case, in which all 4 of the alleged witnesses have no knowledge of the event, the plaintiff doesn't know the year or location of the event, and her own lifelong friend never even heard about it." If no new evidence comes in then it's nothing at all. I'm just saying that if it somehow gains enough credibility that an unbiased person would say that it likely happened, Kavanaugh's ship is sunk. It's nowhere near that right now.

The earth has had higher CO2 levels before without the rise in temperature that you're talking about.

Is Diane Feinstein a lawyer herself? If she is then she has a fiduciary relationship with that woman and isn't allowed to leak any information that the client wanted to keep confidential. DF wouldn't be sent to jail or anything but she would almost certainly be disbarred. It's doubtful that Trump should be the one to order that type of investigation though. I don't know anything about the legal relationship between a Senator and a civilian pawn. I doubt that as a US Senator you would be bound to protect the confidentiality of a mere civilian when your greater sense of loyalty should be to the office you serve in. Reefermadness what emperor started the Russian Collusion investigation? How can it possibly be going on for so long with no evidence of any collusion whatsoever? The FISA warrant was never supposed to be renewed without new evidence, and no new evidence was ever presented. And let's not kid ourselves, we both know that you're rejoicing at the feet of whatever great leader threw that accusation out there.

I think the actual words used to describe her were "lifelong friend". That doesn't necessarily make her a best friend, but you'd think that she would at least know by now whether or not Dr Ford was ever raped. Especially by such a high profile person, and so long ago. How does the topic just never come up in 36 years?

I agree with you re: the hypocrisy of the liberal crowd, and that we can't stop kids from becoming productive adults because of some run-of-the-mill juvenile mistakes, but rape isn't one of them lol. It's a serious thing to be a lawyer, but entirely another to sit on the highest bench in the land, establishing legal precedents that take generations to overturn. The Supreme Court of the United States doesn't have room for a sex offender in my opinion, respect for the law is a cornerstone of any advanced society. Disrespect for the law is already bad enough in the States right now, for various reasons: 1) the fact that Hillary Clinton has gotten away with disregarding subpoenas, 2) the last administration openly advocated disrespect of police while it supported rioting, looting & arson, and 3) high-ranking members of the FBI are being fired and demoted for crimes and because of problems related to their general lack of integrity. I think the States would become a zoo if they allowed Kavanaugh to be a SCJ if it turns out that there's reliable evidence that he did the things that he is accused of.

If it was true then at least something that you said would have to make sense, but that’s not the case, as evidenced by the fact that you’ve completely given up on defending your silly counter-points. You just want to stick to your ad-hominem arguments, and all you have to defend them is a vague reference to science along with some more ad-hominem attacks lol. Your type of debating only works when you’re surrounded by a bunch of useful idiots who chime in with more ad-hominem attacks of their own, like a bunch of crows cawing at a raccoon. You've got zilch reefermadness, but I know that you’re not one to let facts get in the way of a good argument.

Wrong. The other cases have far more evidence, and the Dems don’t care about any of them. That’s the only point being made there. If it becomes apparent that this accusations against BK is likely to be true, and the Republicans don’t care, then you can say gotcha. That won’t happen.

Sad, but apparently true.

Bias? How so? Kavanaugh needs to follow the constitution, that’s it. If the laws/constitution need to be changed that’s up to Congress and the Senate. His record for making the best possible decision is impeccable. Dems don’t have an argument against that.

The truth of the matter is that there was not enough evidence presented to even get a search warrant against him, even if the statute of limitations had not expired. "I don't remember where or when the event happened, and all of the people who I said were witnesses say that they didn't witness these events" isn't enough evidence to get a search warrant. Kavanuagh would never have had to answer to such vague accusations in the normal world. Demmies want Kavanaugh to say "That crying woman is a liar" so that they can say "Look how mean he is to that crying woman", and that would be enough for them to defeat his nomination. It's just like when the Demmies wanted Trump to insult Putin right to his face (along with his whole country) just to give credibility to the Dems' own stupid Trump-Russia collusion "investigation". Honestly when Dems speak it just tweaks my gag reflex something fierce.

I have a feeling that Democrats are far more worried about the fact that he will obey the constitution than they are about whether or not he was a serial gang-rapist. Ted Kennedy left a drowning girl in his car and went home to bed, the Demmies still don't care at all. Bill Clinton preyed on his female employees, raping them and sexually harassing them, Dems now know all about it and they still don't say that "his victims need to be believed" lol - they don't care at all. There are two witnesses and actual evidence of Keith Ellison abusing his wife and the Dems just nominated him to run for Attorney General. The Dems obviously don't care about that either. Hollywood elites pretend to care that Kavanaugh was accused of the "attempted rape" of someone his own age, and yet they gave an Academy Award and a huge round of applause to a 43 year old Roman Polanski who roofied a 13 year old girl and then sodomized her. From Wiki: This is an actual joint statement (ok it's just a summary of all their recent statements) from the Democrat party and the screen actor's guild:

It's really sad to see how low those Dems will go to get their way. When Michelle OBlahblah said "When they go low, we go high", what that really meant was "We will keep on going low until they go low as well, and then we'll start to go high." They're still waiting for the Republicans to sink to their level, if that's even possible.

Ooh you’re so into insulting people’s intelligence. You must be either a genius super-liberal or an angry virtue signaller. Judging by how far you’re reaching to make a point that you would have to be an idiot to believe it’s obviously the latter. Here’s the thing reefermadness: if people were routinely getting gang-raped at local parties she would stop going to local parties, period. Maybe it could happen once and she only found out later, but three times? No way, and certainly not ten. And by her account that’s not what happened anyways - she claims to be a witness to it. That’s not the same as “I know some people who said etc...”. Once she knew for sure about all this, on the rare ovcasion that she had to go to something, like a best friend’s bithday, she would definitely take the time to make sure that “Brett’s gang-rape crew” weren’t going to be there, or she would leave as soon as they showed up. For her to just stick around and wait for the inevitable gang-rape to unfold SEVEN OR EIGHT MORE TIMES like that is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of. Wrap your oh-so-superior cerebral cortex around the fact that girls try really hard to avoid getting gang-raped and they avoid gang-rape parties like they avoid invading armies. This is like the story of the little kids at the California daycare who said that other kids there were getting fed to sharks. And in your other idiotic scenario, where “she knew the guys so she felt like she wouldn’t ever become a victim herself”, she was actively covering for them & normalizing the parties to make it seem safe and cool for other girls to go there. So she WAS AN ACTUAL ACCOMPLICE IN YOUR OWN EXAMPLE. She was like the in-heat coyote, luring male dogs into the desert to be eaten by her pack. I get that you’re a virtue signaller, and you like nothing more than to prove hiw righteous you are, but your epic failure of an attempt to add plausibility to her story just makes it all the more obvious that it’s 100% BS. Thanks for that swingandamiss!

Avenatti's client has the most interesting story line ever. 1st of all, it cracks me up. I burst out laughing the first time I saw it. Sounds terrible right, that I find a rape allegation hilarious? It's only funny because it's not even a little bit believable. Here's the thing, she says she went to ten parties where they were drugging and gang-raping girls. TEN! If you were a school-aged girl and you went to a party where you witnessed something as horrific and grotesque as a gang-rape wouldn't you report that to someone? Or at the very least, not go to the next "party" with those same people? How fun does a party have to be so that you say to yourself "It was an awesome party but the harrowing sights & sounds of the gang-rape at the end kind of brought it down a notch. Still, I can't wait for the next one!"? I'm literally blown away that no one on tv even talks about that. What could possibly have compelled her to go to a second party? Was Prince there? Michael Jackson? Did someone win a free car? And if for some crazy reason you went to a second party and the exact same thing happened again, wouldn't you quit right there? Nope, she went to a 3rd gang rape party. And she went to a 4th gang rape party. And she went to a 5th gang rape party. And she went to a 6th gang rape party. And she went to a 7th gang rape party. And she went to an 8th gang rape party. And then she went to two more gang rape parties. Is she really a "victim" now, or did she know exactly what was going to happen, and she basically consented to it by going there? By the 2nd or 3rd party she was actually more of an accomplice or co-conspirator than anything imo. Helping convince other girls to come to the parties. It honestly seems like a stupid allegation to bring up, really easy to discount it after all these years where none of these hundreds of victims or witnesses said anything for 36 years lol. But here's the BRILLIANT part. I gotta hand it to Sleazanatti.... It really leaves the door wide open for more "victims" to come forward, and their testimony is pre-corroborated by that of his client. If twenty random girls come forward (and they get to become part of history by stopping a Trump nominee appointment so why not?) it all makes perfect sense to the Demmie crowd. This is the ugliest, stupidest gong show to ever afflict a democratic society.

At least manufacturing is your #2 industry, at 11%. You're 4.5% higher than BC, and your population is nearly double ours so that's a lot of extra manufacturing jobs. A lot of extra money coming into the province from outside.

Wiki has a list of terrorist attacks month by month for recent years. I don't know how far it actually goes back. Worldwide there are 150+ per month on average. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_January_2017 It's worth checking these things out.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/608359/gdp-distribution-of-british-columbia-canada-by-industry/

Our Canadian economy is tied to the American economy. When they go up, we go up too. I can't speak for the rest of the country but in BC our economy is based mainly on real estate, and that's pretty sad. If you just count real estate, financing, construction & related services that's the bulk of our economy. Very little of our economy here is based on manufacturing, forestry, fishing, agriculture, mining, etc. I don't know what percentage of the money coming into BC from outside of Canada is for the purchase of real estate but it's probably the lion's share. I know hundreds of people, none of them have jobs that bring money into BC from outside. Teachers, Realtors, mortgage brokers, lawyers, people who work in various fields of construction and renovations, hair dressers, people who work in grocery stores, drive trucks, work for the railway, home inspectors, tech people, medical professionals, police & corrections, advertising, etc. Some of my family members in Alberta worked for coal mines and plants west of Edmonton but those jobs are gone, or going away soon thanks to the Libs/NDP. I have a cousin in Alberta who works on oil rigs but his job is obviously in Trudeau's crosshairs. Those are Alberta jobs anyways. My neighbour across the back alley is a welder and he was working on pipelines, no joke, but I doubt they do much of that right now. Unless of course their pipelines are for raw sewage to go into the ocean. I'm thinking that if the real estate industry here tanks for a while BC is royally screwed.

The problem is that a lot of Canadians (and Americans) know that they are being lied to but they are ok with it as long as it benefits their side. It's especially ok for Libs because it gives them something to bitch about, and they feel like that elevates them socially. Liberalism is a lot like being a born-again Christian: people feel like they instantly pull their reputation up from the gutter by bragging about their religious purity or their liberal superiority. Born again: "I used to rob houses, sell drugs, and I got a lot of people started on crack, but now I'm born again, so I'm going to lecture you on how to live." Liberal: "I don't really know anything about foreign trade, foreign affairs, the economy, world history, religion, or socialism/capitalism but I really hate that guys like Brett Kavanaugh think that they can get away with attempted rape so I'm a Democrat, like Madonna. Trump is like, really really gross. Yeah I know that saying stuff like that proves that I'm like, totally ossummmm, but I don't do it for the instant recognition. I do it because I'm like, a bad-ass social justice warrior, ya know?"

I wish he was harmless to Canadians.

1) Is this a political hit-job or a legitimate issue? 2) Rank the hypocrisy level of the left-wing media, the Democrats and the Hollywood elites on a scale from 1-100. (CNN and the Dems didn’t care about Clinton’s rapes or sexual harassment, although the allegations were more specific, had more credible evidence, and in some cases resulted in civil settlements. What’s more is that the Dems ruthlessly slandered Bill’s accusers but now they’re saying that “all victims need to be believed”. The Hollywood elites pretend to care about this victim, but they gave Roman Polanski an Oscar and a huge round of applause after he fled the country to escape justice after he raped a child that was incapacitated from the quaaloods that Polanski gave them). 3) Is it possible for someone to be a victim of a “harrowing event” like an attempted rape, and yet the victim and witnesses can not remember specific things like the time, location and date? 4) Is it totally bogus that they’re demanding that Ford won’t testify until the FBI investigates the story, despite the fact that rape cases by civilians are out of their jurisdiction, and the statute of limitations has expired? They’re also trying to get the defendant to testify first, which goes against a defendant’s right to a proper chance for their own defence....

About 30-40% of Americans “fear” Trump. Basically anyone stupid enough to watch CNN or MSNBC. Fear mongering and division is what they do. The CBC and CTV here follow CNN like a lost puppy, so there are a lot of Canadians in the same boat as the safe-room, blankie, comfort pony crowd in the US. To be honest I fear every US president until I am comfortable that they won’t start a huge war. Trudeau can’t do anything to you, but he is damaging Canada-US relations which is bad for everyone.

Boges do you understand that there’s a big difference between lying to Congress under oath, and being accused of lying by CNN?

I know there are lots of people calling Trump a serial liar but he has no track record of lying re: material facts as president. Honestly if you look back at all his "big lies" he turned out to be right and CNN was lying the whole time. 1) Trump: "Obama wiretapped me". CNN, Obama, MSNBC: "Haha Trump is a big liar and a joke". Turns out that Obama's crew did spy on Trump. To say "wiretapped Trump directly" isn't 100% accurate but Obama and the media knew Trump was telling the truth when they all laughed and called him a liar. No apologies ever came from that. 2) Trump's lie re: Hillary's debate "preparations" It was some big joke that Trump thought Hillary was surprisingly well-prepared for certain debate questions, and he was a liar/loser for insinuating anything. It turns out that Hillary actually did have some of the questions in her pocket - CNN knew because they gave them to her. Sure Trump slept with a playboy bunny and a porn star, and that's not good, but 90% of the guys you know would have done the same thing given the opportunity and Bill Clinton did far worse. He raped and sexually harassed his employees. Think about the difference between consensual sex with two women who were independently wealthy compared to raping/harassing women who work for you or are interns. CNN never cared about that and they still don't, but for some reason they care that some stupid broad says she was almost raped approximately 36 years ago (doesn't know the exact year, let alone the date), she doesn't remember exactly which party she was at, but there were witnesses there (wink wink, if you want to step fwd and be a witness I'll provide you with some details, hurry we only have til Tuesday). Still after 36 years none of them know exactly when or where. And it's totally honest for Dems to pretend to care about this. And also for Hollywood celebs, who gave an Oscar to Roman Pedophilanski and cheered for him when they all know he was guilty, to pretend to be concerned for someone who is most likely a bullshitter. She says "it's still too harrowing to talk about" but she doesn't remember where or when it happened. Give me a friggin break. If you're following Dems or CNN and you believe anything they say you should never admit to that in public.

Lying to Congress under oath. He has a long history of it, but never with the stakes this high. Re: Trump see #3, and keep in mind that more is known now than when the article was written. Brennan does not want declassification and it’s not for the good of the country or anyone else: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/john-brennan-dishonesty-long-record/