Ford-Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegation

[bush_cheney2004]

Can't have it both ways....Judge Kavanaugh's critics want impartiality and objectivity....except when it comes to abortions !?

[betsy]

This is a surprise!  No one expected this kind of speech!

 

 

Here full written speech here:

 

https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

 

Right after this speech........Democrat Manchin said he'll vote to confirm Kavanaugh!

Edited October 5, 2018 by betsy

[bush_cheney2004]

History books will reflect that Sen. Flake actually saved the Kavanaugh confirmation...Democrats should be careful what they wish for.

If/when Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed and joins the Supreme Court bench, it will be a spectacular win for President Trump and the GOP...a crushing defeat for the Democrats.    Midterm election results will be anti-climactic in comparison.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, scribblet said:

Take cover -  Senator Collins who is considered a moderate who sometimes votes with the Democrats,  is voting yes.. and one Democrat will vote yes.     I actually watched her speech which went on and on, but my goodness, I was impressed (favourably) she went over many of his cases and how he ruled on them showing that he was  fair and impartial -

You don't need to go over his cases. You only need to watch the video of his testimony where he's ranting and snarling about leftists and democrats to know just how 'fair and impartial' he is.

[scribblet]

Senators who voted yes are advised not to go out in public and lock the doors, that's how unhinged the left has become.  Thank goodness senator Collins is a strong woman, the howling fascist mobs are getting violent.  

[Centerpiece]

31 minutes ago, Argus said:

You don't need to go over his cases. You only need to watch the video of his testimony where he's ranting and snarling about leftists and democrats to know just how 'fair and impartial' he is.

I ask you honestly.....if you were completely innocent......and all this stuff was dumped on you - ruining your lifelong career, your family.....knowing that they sat on the accusation for well over a month instead of investigating.......knowing that they waited till the last moment to spring it on the committee.......knowing that somebody leaked the Ford letter that was supposed to be private and confidential......knowing that the democrats referred her to their chosen activist lawyers.....knowing that these same lawyers did not tell her that Grassley had offered to meet her request of going to California to question her in private.....knowing that the Julie Swetnick accusations were so outrageous that even the major print media couldn't bring themselves to run with it......knowing all this and more - and knowing you were innocent - yet seeing your life being dragged through the mud.......would you not be emotionally pissed? As I said before, the only way he could have remained "cool" is if he was guilty.

You're entitled to your opinion of course - and I've been in agreement with you on several other issues - but on this one, I think you're way off base. My opinion of course.

[betsy]

On 10/3/2018 at 8:34 AM, Don Jonas said:

He lied. What's a sock puppet? Some lame attempt to save face because you have no defence other than attack an innocent woman who has more character and courage than you can even imagine?

Best not to reply, you're right. You just keep digging your hole deeper.

Now we know why Leland keyser had said she believe Ford.

 

 

Quote

 

Friend of Dr. Ford Felt Pressure to Revisit Statement

A friend of Christine Blasey Ford told FBI investigators that she felt pressured by Dr. Ford’s allies to revisit her initial statement that she knew nothing about an alleged sexual assault by a teenage Brett Kavanaugh, which she later updated to say that she believed but couldn’t corroborate Dr Ford's account.....

Leland Keyser, who Dr. Ford has said was present at the gathering where she was allegedly assaulted in the 1980s, told investigators that Monica McLean, a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation agent and a friend of Dr. Ford’s, had urged her to clarify her statement, the people said.
 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/n6dl9rPNMn

 

Monica McLean - isn't she the one named by Ford's ex-boyfriend to have talked to Ford about polygraph tests?

Witness-tampering!  Good thing this wasn't a criminal investigation, or they'll have a lot to answer for.

Edited October 6, 2018 by betsy

[Hal 9000]

She said the whole incident came to light because of the door argument she had between her and her husband, except the 2nd door was in place long before that - and was used so they could rent out part of their house.  She testified that she'd never taken a polygraph, but her ex-boyfriend said she's basically an expert at beating the machine.  

Sorry, but she did lie, and more investigation would surely turn up more lies on behalf of Ford.  It was a hail Mary from the dems, and it failed.

BTW - The senate has their own investigators, if the dems knew something or had anything on Kavanaugh, they'd be shouting it from every rooftop, not lamenting about credible witnesses that weren't interviewed.

[Hal 9000]

7 hours ago, Argus said:

Which is bullshit but never mind. Kavanaugh is unworthy because of his own behaviour, not hers. Retired Justice Stevens said as much the other day. And so did 100,000 churches.

Justice Stevens said he came to the conclusion reluctantly, changing his mind about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination after the second round of the judge’s confirmation hearings last week. Judge Kavanaugh’s statements at those hearings, Justice Stevens said, revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work, a point he said had been made by prominent commentators.

“They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities,” Justice Stevens said in remarks to retirees in Boca Raton, Fla. “And I think there is merit in that criticism and that the senators should really pay attention to it.”

“For the good of the court,” he said, “it’s not healthy to get a new justice that can only do a part-time job.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/us/politics/john-paul-stevens-brett-kavanaugh.html

The nation’s largest coalition of Christian churches on Wednesday called for the withdrawal of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination for the Supreme Court.
"Judge Kavanaugh exhibited extreme partisan bias and disrespect towards certain members of the committee and thereby demonstrated that he possesses neither the temperament nor the character essential for a member of the highest court in our nation,” the statement read.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/409775-national-council-of-churches-calls-for-kavanaughs-nomination-to

 

 

Oh Bull, it's no secret that these judges (all of them) have biasses - you don't think RBG has her biasses?  Whether they use them is the question, and all evidence is that Kavanaugh has never used bias in his rulings.

[Hal 9000]

6 hours ago, Goddess said:

Except that Kavanaugh dodged the question when asked directly if he would work to overturn Roe v. Wade.

We also know that Trump flat out said he would be stocking the SC with Justices who would overturn it.

It's an important enough issue that I think we need more than some vague "more than likely he'll uphold it".  

Because he is a potential supreme court judge, he can't say how he'd rule.  That is a trap.  If he says one way or another, he'd be judging a case that he doesn't have the facts on - he simply cannot answer that.

[August1991]

9 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

History books will reflect that Sen. Flake actually saved the Kavanaugh confirmation...Democrats should be careful what they wish for.

If/when Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed and joins the Supreme Court bench, it will be a spectacular win for President Trump and the GOP...a crushing defeat for the Democrats.    Midterm election results will be anti-climactic in comparison.

I tend to agree about the win.

Flake? I reckon that it will be Maine's Collins' vote that will be remembered....

=======

Let's see how this plays out. (Chickens, hatched etc....)

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, August1991 said:

I tend to agree about the win.

Flake? I reckon that it will be Maine's Collins' vote that will be remembered....

=======

Let's see how this plays out. (Chickens, hatched etc....)

 

Either way, it has been a remarkable, public display of raw American political power.   Senator Mitch McConnell kept his eyes on the prize, navigating the mine field quite well.   The Democrats lost another battle in the culture wars.

Canadian news media like the CBC/The National have been glued to this unfolding drama.   There is no "advise and consent" role for Parliament in SCC appointments.   There is no chance for high drama on national television....that's what the USA is for !

"Elections have consequences" - President Barack Obama (2009)

 

[August1991]

10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Either way, it has been a remarkable, public display of raw American political power.

....

I completely agree. America is often a public display.

So as much as I admire America, I prefer to be a good neighbour.

[betsy]

7 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Oh Bull, it's no secret that these judges (all of them) have biasses - you don't think RBG has her biasses?  Whether they use them is the question, and all evidence is that Kavanaugh has never used bias in his rulings.

Argus touts out this retired Judge Stevens' opinion - who could be going senile for all we know - and yet, ignores the clear explanation of Collins!  

Argus is clutching at anything now....

 

Edited October 6, 2018 by betsy

[scribblet]

RBG has actually shown her bias when she spoke out against Trump, so yup, they all have biases.   This Roe/Wade thing is funny tho because he can't wave a magic wand to make it disappear, there has to be a case before the S.C. ...     does anyone know if there is one heading to the S.C. that could change Roe/Wade.    
RBG is looking very frail, I wonder if she can last until 2020, or even stay awake.  

Good thing Obama wasn’t nominated for SCOTUS cos he admits Heavy Drinking, Drug Problems As An 'Adolescent' In Rare Video Footage

"I might have drank a 6-pack in an hour before going back to class, things like that."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36649/obama-admits-heavy-drinking-drug-problems-ryan-saavedra

Sen. Grassley has been trying to get Ford's attorney's to turn over evidence, That last paragraph sure is interesting  https://www.nationalreview.com/news/chuck-grassley-chastises-christine-fords-attorney-refusing-turn-over-documents/

Edited October 6, 2018 by scribblet

[mowich]

"This does not mean that everything is black and white. That every accused is Harvey Weinstein. I'm sure we'll find the correct way to deal with this explosive cultural movement." 

I sure hope you are right, but watching those screaming shrieking harpies littering the halls of the Senate yesterday did little more than show their absolute inability to deal with this matter in a sound reasoning manner.  The list of unsubstantiated allegations against men grows daily.  Men are being pilloried for simply looking the wrong way at a woman.  I don't see an end to this calamity any time soon.

[Argus]

16 hours ago, Centerpiece said:

I ask you honestly.....if you were completely innocent......and all this stuff was dumped on you - ruining your lifelong career, your family..

Neither his career nor his family seems to have been ruined at all. And it is clear he is far from innocent. There are a number of people now speaking about what a drinker he was and what a surly, mean drunk he was. The Republicans put all this down to some kind of grand Democrat conspiracy, but where were the conspirators during the Neil Gorsuch hearings? They didn't exist because Gorsuch had an immaculate past - which is what you would expect of a candidate for the supreme court. 

As for the timing, yes, probably all politics. So what? If you can't handle the heat stay out of the kitchen. Had he been upfront and answered questions directly, not been evasive and dishonest in trying to hide his hard-drinking, hard-partying past I'd feel differently. But it wasn't just his emotionalism which makes him unfit but his dishonesty. And if there's one thing you don't want on the supreme court, it's a dishonest man.

 

Edited October 6, 2018 by Argus

[Argus]

6 hours ago, betsy said:

Argus touts out this retired Judge Stevens' opinion - who could be going senile for all we know - and yet, ignores the clear explanation of Collins!  

Argus is clutching at anything now....

Betsy ignores that the organization representing 100,000 Christian churches thinks him unfit. But then, Betsy doesn't pay much attention to what Christian leaders think.

[mowich]

On 10/2/2018 at 2:53 PM, betsy said:

Well........12 years sitting as a federal judge, there's never been any complaint about being drunk, or about his temperament, or about any improprieties with women!

The standards can't get any lower with the Democrats!  This is what Dem Blumenthall said in that hearing:

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408857-rep-sen-blumenthal-lied-for-years-should-reconsider-questioning-kavanaughs

 

Blumenthall was caught blatantly  lying in 2010! 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html

 

Someone remembered about his lies:

 

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408857-rep-sen-blumenthal-lied-for-years-should-reconsider-questioning-kavanaughs

 

So - direct your finger at those who support Democrats, if you're talking lowest - DEPLORABLE - standards!  What's happening is bigger than just having Kavanaugh confirmed.   We're seeing Democrats blatantly ignoring human rights.  Kavanaugh has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.  

Maybe, the full implication of what the Dems are doing to this guy - and to democracy - hasn't sunk in yet.   I urge you to sit down and contemplate on it.

I find it passing strange that Ford had no problems with Kavanaugh being elected judge to a lower court there able to make decisions regarding the fate of others every single day. 

[mowich]

On 10/3/2018 at 3:05 AM, betsy said:

With the way the Democrats had done away with this man's rights - before the whole world - these people are not qualified to be leaders of a DEMOCRATIC country.

Heck, even their party name, is a sham!  "DEMOCRATS," indeed.   Yeah right.  

Imagine their "credibility" promoting democracy in dictator-held countries!

The Dems lost all their credibility when they chose Hillary as their presidential candidate.  The same Hillary Clinton who stood in lock-step with her serial philandering husband when he was embroiled in the Lewinsky affair.

[Centerpiece]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Neither his career nor his family seems to have been ruined at all. And it is clear he is far from innocent. There are a number of people now speaking about what a drinker he was and what a surly, mean drunk he was. The Republicans put all this down to some kind of grand Democrat conspiracy, but where were the conspirators during the Neil Gorsuch hearings? They didn't exist because Gorsuch had an immaculate past - which is what you would expect of a candidate for the supreme court. 

As for the timing, yes, probably all politics. So what? If you can't handle the heat stay out of the kitchen. Had he been upfront and answered questions directly, not been evasive and dishonest in trying to hide his hard-drinking, hard-partying past I'd feel differently. But it wasn't just his emotionalism which makes him unfit but his dishonesty. And if there's one thing you don't want on the supreme court, it's a dishonest man.

 

"Neither his career nor his family seems to have been ruined at all.". Unbelievable - can't think of a response for that one.

Gorsuch was not the swing judge that gives ultimate sway to Conservative opinions on the Supreme Court. Do not forget that the Democrats said they would do anything and everything to prevent Kavanuagh's confirmation. Kavanaugh passed all previous FBI backgrounders and all the one-on-one hearings. It was only the Ford allegation that  raised these further allegations. Kavanaugh was not evasive about his drinking - he said he drank beer and there were times that he had too many. What else would you expect him to say? Is there a time in his past that he could be construed to be surly after having too many. Once, twice? Maybe. Or maybe, just maybe - those few who now say he was a bad drinker have their own biases, jealousies or whatever. What's dishonest about saying he had too many at parties every now and then? Don't you think the FBI backgrounders covered most of those kinds of accusations? People who supposedly drink so much that they black out or can't remember or become belligerent have an obvious drinking problem. Has Kavanaugh's lifelong actions indicated that such a problem exists? No.

Back to the Democrats. They threw Ford under the bus - and backed up over her. She wanted everything confidential. They sat on her story. They leaked her letter at the last minute. They provided an activist lawyer for her who unbeknownst to Ford, did not pass on Grassley's invitation to go and meet with her. It was more than politics.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOr808UXOgE

 

[Centerpiece]

Kavanaugh could have avoided all of this if he had only taken his cue from Justin Trudeau..............

“There’s a lot of uncertainties around this. In terms of my recollection there was no untoward or inappropriate action but she was in a professional context. Who knows where her mind was and I fully respect her ability to experience something differently.”

[Hal 9000]

I gotta think that any of us who partied in the 80's (men or women) have an opportunity to be metoo'd.

[WestCanMan]

21 hours ago, Goddess said:

Except that Kavanaugh dodged the question when asked directly if he would work to overturn Roe v. Wade.

We also know that Trump flat out said he would be stocking the SC with Justices who would overturn it.

It's an important enough issue that I think we need more than some vague "more than likely he'll uphold it".  

SCJs do not have to answer questions about how they would rule on specific cases. 

End of story. 

[WestCanMan]

19 hours ago, Argus said:

You don't need to go over his cases. You only need to watch the video of his testimony where he's ranting and snarling about leftists and democrats to know just how 'fair and impartial' he is.

Bork tried to stay calm and classy and he failed. Kavanaugh needed to show emotion, and to be unafraid to tell the truth. 

This is a totally partisn hit-job and everyone knows it, including you Argus.

Democrats nominated a woman beater two months ago and they haven’t said a bad word about Clinton despite mounds of evidence and accusations from several of his own employees.  

If you think this was a “rape allegation” issue then you’ve been completely duped.