Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

That's a pretty ironic statement in light of the many DCUM posters who think just an accusation makes something a fact.

As compared to the people here who 100% think she is lying? Certainly not a fact-based opinion.

Which is why we needed an investigation...

The facts are indeed simple.

1. She made an allegation, which is not the same as the truth.

2. The people she named in the allegation have all denied memory of the party in question. One of the people was her close high school friend who further said she had no memory of meeting Brett Kavanaugh.

3. Specific details her therapist wrote down several years later were later contracted by Blasey-Ford. These include things like the general timeframe for the party (originally mid-1980s, she later changed it to early 1980s to conveniently fit in when Kavanaugh was still in high school). Or the number of men who apparently jumped on her (originally it was four, she changed it to two).

4. Blasey-Ford cannot remember many quite simple details surrounding the alleged event, such as how she got home. Or where the party was. Or whose house it was. Despite that this was only a small gathering.

5. Blasey-Ford made various statements about being afraid to fly or needing two doors, which were both contradicted in a statement from a boyfriend of six years, who pointed out she happily lived in a studio apartment with only one door for a number of years.

6. Blasey-Ford's therapy notes were, suspiciously, failed to be handed over to the Senate despite the extraordinary sensitivity of the circumstances. Yet somehow the Post still got a copy.

I can go on. What further investigation are you looking for? Are you simply upset that the actual facts we have do not match up with the allegation and if anything, they suggest that Blasey Ford either made up the event or is badly remembering what happened that we simply cannot take her seriously? I don't see any provable facts that support Blasey-Ford. At all. You want an investigation to keep hunting for "facts" that simply don't exist, rather than accept that the facts that do exist simply do not support what you want to believe.

There are plenty of facts that you are missing.

Ford knew that Mike Judge worked in a Safeway as a teen and recalled seeing him there after the incident.

The boys Ford claimed were at the party were all on a Friday night entry in Kavanaugh’s own calendar. So Ford has a lot of knowledge about Kavanaugh’s group and a real investigation may have found corroboration there.

[Anonymous]

Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

That's a pretty ironic statement in light of the many DCUM posters who think just an accusation makes something a fact.

As compared to the people here who 100% think she is lying? Certainly not a fact-based opinion.

Which is why we needed an investigation...

It's a shame that Senator Feinstein, etc didn't let the process go forward sooner. It's apparent that someone had a reason for thinking the news should be released closer to the time of a confirmation vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

Facts matter a lot to Trump supporters. Like Chrissy getting dragged out against her will to testify about her BS allegation after requesting anonymity. That the FBI investigated the BS allegation for a week and apparently found 0 corroborating witnesses. Facts like those matter a lot.

How does that even make sense? She was dragged out against her will for an allegation she made up? Explain to me how that works. You have no sense of logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

That's a pretty ironic statement in light of the many DCUM posters who think just an accusation makes something a fact.

As compared to the people here who 100% think she is lying? Certainly not a fact-based opinion.

Which is why we needed an investigation...

The facts are indeed simple.

1. She made an allegation, which is not the same as the truth.

2. The people she named in the allegation have all denied memory of the party in question. One of the people was her close high school friend who further said she had no memory of meeting Brett Kavanaugh.

3. Specific details her therapist wrote down several years later were later contracted by Blasey-Ford. These include things like the general timeframe for the party (originally mid-1980s, she later changed it to early 1980s to conveniently fit in when Kavanaugh was still in high school). Or the number of men who apparently jumped on her (originally it was four, she changed it to two).

4. Blasey-Ford cannot remember many quite simple details surrounding the alleged event, such as how she got home. Or where the party was. Or whose house it was. Despite that this was only a small gathering.

5. Blasey-Ford made various statements about being afraid to fly or needing two doors, which were both contradicted in a statement from a boyfriend of six years, who pointed out she happily lived in a studio apartment with only one door for a number of years.

6. Blasey-Ford's therapy notes were, suspiciously, failed to be handed over to the Senate despite the extraordinary sensitivity of the circumstances. Yet somehow the Post still got a copy.

I can go on. What further investigation are you looking for? Are you simply upset that the actual facts we have do not match up with the allegation and if anything, they suggest that Blasey Ford either made up the event or is badly remembering what happened that we simply cannot take her seriously? I don't see any provable facts that support Blasey-Ford. At all. You want an investigation to keep hunting for "facts" that simply don't exist, rather than accept that the facts that do exist simply do not support what you want to believe.

There are plenty of facts that you are missing.

Ford knew that Mike Judge worked in a Safeway as a teen and recalled seeing him there after the incident.

The boys Ford claimed were at the party were all on a Friday night entry in Kavanaugh’s own calendar. So Ford has a lot of knowledge about Kavanaugh’s group and a real investigation may have found corroboration there.

How does knowing that judge worked at Safeway prove prove that she was assaulted? Really failing to see the logical connection here. What a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You're quite the hypocrite, aren't you?

Calling for everyone who voted for Kavanaugh to be personally and politically eviscerated, then at the same time calling for people to take out a moderate position.

To me it's pretty clear what the moderate position was: there is no evidence of guilt against Kavanaugh beyond a single women's unsubstantiated and unverified claim that has been rejected by all the other figures she named in the same claim and whose story and memory is riddled with so many gaps and inconsistencies. How is supporting her the moderate position? Susan Collins of Maine had it right.

Oh, never mind. I'm talking on the DCUM political forum.

We don’t know what Judge said to the FBI and they were only allowed to talk to six people in total. Six.

Furthermore, I realize you’re feeling spicy because you think you're a lone wolf in the face of a wall of liberals, but the fact that proven perjury - Leahy’s emails - and very questionable debt that has NOT been addressed doesn’t bother you is a big problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

That's a pretty ironic statement in light of the many DCUM posters who think just an accusation makes something a fact.

As compared to the people here who 100% think she is lying? Certainly not a fact-based opinion.

Which is why we needed an investigation...

The facts are indeed simple.

1. She made an allegation, which is not the same as the truth.

2. The people she named in the allegation have all denied memory of the party in question. One of the people was her close high school friend who further said she had no memory of meeting Brett Kavanaugh.

3. Specific details her therapist wrote down several years later were later contracted by Blasey-Ford. These include things like the general timeframe for the party (originally mid-1980s, she later changed it to early 1980s to conveniently fit in when Kavanaugh was still in high school). Or the number of men who apparently jumped on her (originally it was four, she changed it to two).

4. Blasey-Ford cannot remember many quite simple details surrounding the alleged event, such as how she got home. Or where the party was. Or whose house it was. Despite that this was only a small gathering.

5. Blasey-Ford made various statements about being afraid to fly or needing two doors, which were both contradicted in a statement from a boyfriend of six years, who pointed out she happily lived in a studio apartment with only one door for a number of years.

6. Blasey-Ford's therapy notes were, suspiciously, failed to be handed over to the Senate despite the extraordinary sensitivity of the circumstances. Yet somehow the Post still got a copy.

I can go on. What further investigation are you looking for? Are you simply upset that the actual facts we have do not match up with the allegation and if anything, they suggest that Blasey Ford either made up the event or is badly remembering what happened that we simply cannot take her seriously? I don't see any provable facts that support Blasey-Ford. At all. You want an investigation to keep hunting for "facts" that simply don't exist, rather than accept that the facts that do exist simply do not support what you want to believe.

There are plenty of facts that you are missing.

Ford knew that Mike Judge worked in a Safeway as a teen and recalled seeing him there after the incident.

The boys Ford claimed were at the party were all on a Friday night entry in Kavanaugh’s own calendar. So Ford has a lot of knowledge about Kavanaugh’s group and a real investigation may have found corroboration there.

How does knowing that judge worked at Safeway prove prove that she was assaulted? Really failing to see the logical connection here. What a joke.

I doubt you have a sound grasp of logic or argument, but let’s assume that you do. The previous response pointed to inconsistencies in Ford’s memories as proof that she manufactured or mistook her allegation. But there are multiple facts that suggest she knew these men, she remembers details about them. How about the fact that her recollection matches a date on Kavanaugh’s calendar? What is the chance that this was a coincidence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

Absolutely.

And what is it with the liberal logic that "just because nobody remembers something happening doesn't mean it DIDN'T happen?" You could say that about anything! The accuser has to prove it DID happen. And when the accuser can't remember when....or where.....or how she got there....or how she got home....and nobody can confirm her story.....and she changed the timeline.....and she was caught in lies....well, she certainly didn't come close to proving anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do not know that she is keeping all of the contributions. You are speculating.

She SHOULD after what she has been put through.

Once again, as Bart O'Kavanaugh said "what comes around goes around." Keep that in the back of your silly little minds.

FACTS don’t matter to Trump supporters.

That's a pretty ironic statement in light of the many DCUM posters who think just an accusation makes something a fact.

As compared to the people here who 100% think she is lying? Certainly not a fact-based opinion.

Which is why we needed an investigation...

It's a shame that Senator Feinstein, etc didn't let the process go forward sooner. It's apparent that someone had a reason for thinking the news should be released closer to the time of a confirmation vote.

Real question: what difference did it make when the allegation was released? The timing of the release should have no bearing on how thorough the investigation was or how seriously the allegation was taken, unless you assume that it was manufactured from the get go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

I think for any of those mere mortals not funded by the Federalist Society there would be a real investigation and not the White House tying the FBI’s hands in regards to whom they may speak and may take statements from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

Absolutely.

And what is it with the liberal logic that "just because nobody remembers something happening doesn't mean it DIDN'T happen?" You could say that about anything! The accuser has to prove it DID happen. And when the accuser can't remember when....or where.....or how she got there....or how she got home....and nobody can confirm her story.....and she changed the timeline.....and she was caught in lies....well, she certainly didn't come close to proving anything.

No light can penetrate the dark glasses of right wing illogic.

[Anonymous]

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

Sure, there needs to be a legitimate investigation. You know, instead of rushing a lifetime appointment through and then having the pussy-grabber-in-chief lie about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not remembering things, such as parties, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just because one of Ford's friends doesn't remember being with Kavanaugh 35 years ago, that in no way exonerates Kavanaugh.

If a student accuses a teacher, counselor, school psychologist, priest, etc of inappropriate contact 35 years later, I happen to think there needs to be better recall and/or corroboration before ruining a person's reputation with only accusations.

I think for any of those mere mortals not funded by the Federalist Society there would be a real investigation and not the White House tying the FBI’s hands in regards to whom they may speak and may take statements from.

PP here. But in the meantime, just fine to share the accusation(s) in the media??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're quite the hypocrite, aren't you?

Calling for everyone who voted for Kavanaugh to be personally and politically eviscerated, then at the same time calling for people to take out a moderate position.

To me it's pretty clear what the moderate position was: there is no evidence of guilt against Kavanaugh beyond a single women's unsubstantiated and unverified claim that has been rejected by all the other figures she named in the same claim and whose story and memory is riddled with so many gaps and inconsistencies. How is supporting her the moderate position? Susan Collins of Maine had it right.

Oh, never mind. I'm talking on the DCUM political forum.

We don’t know what Judge said to the FBI and they were only allowed to talk to six people in total. Six.

Furthermore, I realize you’re feeling spicy because you think you're a lone wolf in the face of a wall of liberals, but the fact that proven perjury - Leahy’s emails - and very questionable debt that has NOT been addressed doesn’t bother you is a big problem.

No. We don’t know what Judge said. But, you can bet your bippy that if he had said anything that came close to corroborating her story, it would have been leaked. What he said was a reiteration of what he said in his letter to the SJC - otherwise we would have heard about the differences.
And, your claim that they only talked to six is incorrect. They talked to 10 people.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/409838-white-house-10-individuals-were-contacted-in-fbi-kavanaugh