Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It's a picture of him watching something that can't be seen. Did he watch the whole thing or was he indeed working on his own stuff and occasionally looked up? |
Anonymous
It was a tweet. From his aide, someone he pays, that specifically says he was watching the proceedings. The tweet was deleted after he told Senator Harris that he did not watch. He lied. |
Anonymous
|
Dem Playbook:
Throw out unsubstantiated allegations of gang rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder Make sure every media source repeats those allegations as fact Make sure that any he said/she said is in front of the public Attack the character of the accused when he dares himself Make fun of the accused when he gets emotional when speaking of his wife and kids Use the media to make fun of the accused |
Anonymous
He lied about a lot of things he didn’t need to lie about. There’s something sleazy and dishonest about him. I get the heebie-jeebies. |
Anonymous
Another witness from Yale - Chad Ludington
https://twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1046513030924828672 |
Anonymous
Repugs cry like a baby and make this white man who has skated by on privilege his entire life the victim. It’s crazy that white entitlement extends all the way to a SCOTUS seat. This is America you big baby. Nobody owes you anything. |
Anonymous
Thank you for sharing, I had not yet seen that. IT goes along with what I saw for myself at the hearing. He was lying like a dog. |
Anonymous
|
This is an interesting Ted talk on memory by a memory researcher who found that some people were going into therapy with one problem (depression, eating disorders, etc) and coming out of therapy false memories of abuse or horrific events that never actually happened to them due to 'repressed memory' psychotherapy.
Go to 8:43 at https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory#t-523210 and watch from there. It's really interesting. |
Anonymous
What a sham. They should give the full report to the SJC because otherwise there will be a cloud of suspicion that the FBI found something bad that only the WH knows which would make Kavanaugh beholden to them. Is it normal for a WH to scrub background investigations? |
Anonymous
I think the point is that ostensibly the White House told the FBI not to contact Safeway, whereas in any ordinary investigation, the FBI would make that call on its own. |
Anonymous
we already talked about repressed memory therapy on the second thread. |
Anonymous
|
John Nolte's take:
By any standard of truth, fairness, classical liberalism, evidence, and facts, Dr. Ford is not only not credible, she is nothing close to credible. Let me count the ways… She has aligned herself with the far-left. She straight-up lied about being afraid to fly. She said she wanted anonymity but continually reached out to the far-left Washington Post. Her polygraph is a farce. Her story has been carefully weaved into a Kafka-esque nightmare no man (even with detailed calendars) can ever escape from. Every single one of her witnesses refutes her story — has no memory of the gathering in question or says it doesn’t happen, and this includes a lifelong friend. Her team was so desperate to have The Woman Who Wants Anonymity to testify publicly, they turned down the opportunity to have her questioned in private at her home in California — and then lied about it. Ford’s therapist’s notes from 2012 also refute here tale, even as the media and Democrats try to gaslight us into believing the opposite. Ford originally claimed four boys tried to rape her when she was in her late teens in the mid-eighties. Now she says it was one rapist and one bystander when she was 15 in the early eighties. Ford refused to give her therapist’s notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee. In the statement she wrote out in her farce of a polygraph test, Ford crossed out “early 80’s” so it would only read “80’s.” Ford told the Committee the “primary impact” of the event occurred during the “four years after” it happened. She goes on to say, “I struggled academically. I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in College. When I was 17 I went off to college, I had a very hard time.” Note how she skips over two whole years, her junior and senior years in high school; the two school years directly after the attack (unless it did indeed happen in her late teens). To later confirm the event did in fact happen in 1982, Ford told the Committee she was able to pin it down to 1982 because she remembered she did not yet have her drivers’ license. But… she also says she doesn’t remember how she got to or from the house party, so how does she know she didn’t drive herself? Ford also used Mark Judge’s Safeway job to confirm the 1982 timeline. She testified she saw him working there 6-8 weeks after the attack. She could not yet drive, so her mother drove her there, but for some bizarre reason Ford and her mother entered the Safeway using different doors. (And now mom can’t confirm this happened!) Five times during her testimony she mentioned Safeway to verify the date. How could she know such a thing unless it really happened? Well, in his memoir (which began circulating online among Kavanaugh critics in the week before Ford’s testimony) Judge helpfully reveals he was working at the “local supermarket” during the “summer before senior year.” In summation: On top of all four of her own witnesses refuting her allegations against Kavanaugh, so too do the notes taken by her own therapist. (Margot Cleveland’s tweet thread was indispensable for much of this — you will want to read it all.) Dr. Ford’s allegations are not only not credible — they are ludicrous, a joke… Even what she does remember is so full of holes you could bounce Brian Stelter through it: She didn’t hear two very drunk and belligerent boys sneak up on her? Why was music already on in a room no one was using? Wouldn’t blasting music ensure someone came upstairs to see what was going on, especially whoever’s house it was? This is completely counter-intuitive to criminal behavior. After she locked herself in the bathroom, her rapists didn’t try to get at her? Didn’t jiggle the doorknob? Didn’t try to claim they were kidding? All tuned up for a rape, they just gave up and went downstairs laughing like nothing happened? She remember how many beers she had (only one), but has been wildly inconsistent on the number of people who attended this small gathering, the number of people who were in the room where the assault allegedly happened, and by extension the number of boys who tried to rape her. She left without telling her best friend? She left without WARNING her best friend there were two rapists in the house? No one asked why she was leaving or found it strange enough to ask her the following day why she just vanished from the party? She can remember how many beers she had (one) but not whose house she was in, how she got home, the date, the place, how many people were there (sometimes it’s 4, or 5 or 6), or anything solid? She will show the Washington Post her therapist’s note but not the Senate, which represents We the People? |
Anonymous
Thought he claimed he sometimes drank too much when younger and acted stupid but never blacked out or sexually assaulted anyone. What's the exact lie? |
Anonymous
Good for you. |
Anonymous
Powerful quote from the end of the talk: "If I've learned anything from these decades of working on these problems it's this: just because somebody tells you something and they say it with confidence, just because they say it with lots of detail, just because they express emotion when they say it, it doesn't mean that it really happened." |