Kavanaugh vote postponed. Judiciary Committee hearing on Sexual Assault complain Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only the federal government had a bureau or something with professional investigators who could gather information about this claim. Seems like it would result in more reliable information than this letter writing campaign from people's lawyers that will be evaluated under an ad hoc stew of procedural rules being made up on the fly.

Instead, best case scenario for Kavanaugh now is that he gets confirmed as Justice* Rapey McDrinksalot.

If the individuals repeated verbatim to the bureau what was said in the letters, that would satisfy you?

Presumably the investigators would ask follow up questions and, if other names cropped up, they'd follow those leads. They'd review the therapist notes, ask the therapist about the circumstances surrounding the creation of those notes, get clarity on the four in the room versus two in the room question. They'd ask Kavanaugh questions and follow up questions before letting him know what the other sources had said. Then they'd issue a report for the committee to consider. That would be put in the balance with all of the other pros and cons of Kavanaugh's background. How heavily it weighs depends on what the investigation reveals: if the available evidence suggests that Ford's a delusional liar, then it would add no weight. If the available evidence suggests that Kavanaugh is presently lying about the incident, then it would add considerable weight. And if the evidence points somewhere in the middle, you adjust the weight accordingly.

Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix.

I wish this were a sticky. I have no idea how anyone can disagree with this very reasonable take.

You never mentioned having the investigators get a statement from Ford or question her. You mentioned Kavanaugh, but not her. So no, this is partisan claptrap, not sticky worthy.

Of course they interview Ford. And they do it without telling her what the other sources have said. Conduct a professional investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only the federal government had a bureau or something with professional investigators who could gather information about this claim. Seems like it would result in more reliable information than this letter writing campaign from people's lawyers that will be evaluated under an ad hoc stew of procedural rules being made up on the fly.

Instead, best case scenario for Kavanaugh now is that he gets confirmed as Justice* Rapey McDrinksalot.

If the individuals repeated verbatim to the bureau what was said in the letters, that would satisfy you?

Presumably the investigators would ask follow up questions and, if other names cropped up, they'd follow those leads. They'd review the therapist notes, ask the therapist about the circumstances surrounding the creation of those notes, get clarity on the four in the room versus two in the room question. They'd ask Kavanaugh questions and follow up questions before letting him know what the other sources had said. Then they'd issue a report for the committee to consider. That would be put in the balance with all of the other pros and cons of Kavanaugh's background. How heavily it weighs depends on what the investigation reveals: if the available evidence suggests that Ford's a delusional liar, then it would add no weight. If the available evidence suggests that Kavanaugh is presently lying about the incident, then it would add considerable weight. And if the evidence points somewhere in the middle, you adjust the weight accordingly.

Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix.

I wish this were a sticky. I have no idea how anyone can disagree with this very reasonable take.

You never mentioned having the investigators get a statement from Ford or wyestiin her. You mentioned Kavanaugh, but not her. So no, this is partisan claptrap, not sticky worthy.

Goodness. No one alive would support only one party being questioned. Of course the adults here supporting any investigation want her questioned, too! You are seriously tilting at windmills here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the effort that the White House/Grassely team put into painting Dr. Ford as "confused" is going to sink him. It appears to me the Georgetown Prep student Kavanaugh wants us to believe was the attacker is a good friend and took one for the team. It will be easy to find the pay off funds and communication between Whelan and John Doe. Here is Whelan's deleted tweet. The name and address of Schoolteacher have been redacted but I saw the original. This guy is a school teacher and signed a letter of endorsement for Kavanaugh. Note the overlap with Kavanaugh in the yearbook. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whelan-nutbar-twitter-thread-preserved-for-posterity He would be suing if he weren't complicit.

Kavanaugh has stated numerous times, unequivocally, that he was not at this party and did not do what Dr. Ford is claiming.
That leaves really two options. Either she is not telling the truth, or this event happened and she has the people involved wrong. Since Dr. Ford does not appear to have any reason to make up this story, the latter scenario is more likely. It totally makes sense that this is Kavanaugh’s thinking.

Option 3 - he’s lying. Which he has done before.

So not only is he lying, but all of the people the accuser named are lying for him? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the effort that the White House/Grassely team put into painting Dr. Ford as "confused" is going to sink him. It appears to me the Georgetown Prep student Kavanaugh wants us to believe was the attacker is a good friend and took one for the team. It will be easy to find the pay off funds and communication between Whelan and John Doe. Here is Whelan's deleted tweet. The name and address of Schoolteacher have been redacted but I saw the original. This guy is a school teacher and signed a letter of endorsement for Kavanaugh. Note the overlap with Kavanaugh in the yearbook. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whelan-nutbar-twitter-thread-preserved-for-posterity He would be suing if he weren't complicit.

Kavanaugh has stated numerous times, unequivocally, that he was not at this party and did not do what Dr. Ford is claiming.
That leaves really two options. Either she is not telling the truth, or this event happened and she has the people involved wrong. Since Dr. Ford does not appear to have any reason to make up this story, the latter scenario is more likely. It totally makes sense that this is Kavanaugh’s thinking.

Option 3 - he’s lying. Which he has done before.

So not only is he lying, but all of the people the accuser named are lying for him? Wow.

They aren’t lying for him. They have different recalls, as they were not attacked; this proves or disproves nothing, and warrants investigation. Ford and her counsel have never attacked the others as
liars - only you have. Congratulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only the federal government had a bureau or something with professional investigators who could gather information about this claim. Seems like it would result in more reliable information than this letter writing campaign from people's lawyers that will be evaluated under an ad hoc stew of procedural rules being made up on the fly.

Instead, best case scenario for Kavanaugh now is that he gets confirmed as Justice* Rapey McDrinksalot.

If the individuals repeated verbatim to the bureau what was said in the letters, that would satisfy you?

Presumably the investigators would ask follow up questions and, if other names cropped up, they'd follow those leads. They'd review the therapist notes, ask the therapist about the circumstances surrounding the creation of those notes, get clarity on the four in the room versus two in the room question. They'd ask Kavanaugh questions and follow up questions before letting him know what the other sources had said. Then they'd issue a report for the committee to consider. That would be put in the balance with all of the other pros and cons of Kavanaugh's background. How heavily it weighs depends on what the investigation reveals: if the available evidence suggests that Ford's a delusional liar, then it would add no weight. If the available evidence suggests that Kavanaugh is presently lying about the incident, then it would add considerable weight. And if the evidence points somewhere in the middle, you adjust the weight accordingly.

Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix.

I wish this were a sticky. I have no idea how anyone can disagree with this very reasonable take.

You never mentioned having the investigators get a statement from Ford or wyestiin her. You mentioned Kavanaugh, but not her. So no, this is partisan claptrap, not sticky worthy.

Goodness. No one alive would support only one party being questioned. Of course the adults here supporting any investigation want her questioned, too! You are seriously tilting at windmills here.

The poster never actually said it, though. I don’t make assumptions. And resorting to rhetorical cliches such as “no one alive” and “the adults” does not change that. So it sounds like you’re the one battling imaginary text.

[Anonymous]

What man has 65 or so women poised to vouch for his character when called upon?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What man has 65 or so women poised to vouch for his character when called upon?

Every member of the country club is willing to vouch for him, no questions asked m

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, who is the leaker? Name released?

Someone better speak up and share this info. Surely, they didn't think they could just anonymously throw out a dangerous allegation like that and slink into the night, unwilling to speak about it.

Do you mean Raj Shah? It's strange how everyone points at him whenever there's a leak. He seems to be the designated fall guy.

It was a Democrat, almost definitely in Feinstein's office, who leaked this info. Someone has done a hit and run by posting that we know who it is, but won't answer the question about who that is.

[Anonymous]

Actually it is confirmed now that Raj Shah called operatives about the story and the name, so it did come from the White House.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What man has 65 or so women poised to vouch for his character when called upon?

Every member of the country club is willing to vouch for him, no questions asked m

The picture of the group kind of looked like what I assume most of the women who post here about private schools look like.

[Anonymous]

The partisan Fox News Polls illustrates Kavanaugh as deeply under water

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/23/fox-news-poll-record-number-voters-oppose-kavanaugh-nomination.html

So for those still defending Kavanaugh, congrats, you are in the deep minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only the federal government had a bureau or something with professional investigators who could gather information about this claim. Seems like it would result in more reliable information than this letter writing campaign from people's lawyers that will be evaluated under an ad hoc stew of procedural rules being made up on the fly.

Instead, best case scenario for Kavanaugh now is that he gets confirmed as Justice* Rapey McDrinksalot.

If the individuals repeated verbatim to the bureau what was said in the letters, that would satisfy you?

Presumably the investigators would ask follow up questions and, if other names cropped up, they'd follow those leads. They'd review the therapist notes, ask the therapist about the circumstances surrounding the creation of those notes, get clarity on the four in the room versus two in the room question. They'd ask Kavanaugh questions and follow up questions before letting him know what the other sources had said. Then they'd issue a report for the committee to consider. That would be put in the balance with all of the other pros and cons of Kavanaugh's background. How heavily it weighs depends on what the investigation reveals: if the available evidence suggests that Ford's a delusional liar, then it would add no weight. If the available evidence suggests that Kavanaugh is presently lying about the incident, then it would add considerable weight. And if the evidence points somewhere in the middle, you adjust the weight accordingly.

Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix.

I wish this were a sticky. I have no idea how anyone can disagree with this very reasonable take.

You never mentioned having the investigators get a statement from Ford or wyestiin her. You mentioned Kavanaugh, but not her. So no, this is partisan claptrap, not sticky worthy.

Goodness. No one alive would support only one party being questioned. Of course the adults here supporting any investigation want her questioned, too! You are seriously tilting at windmills here.

The poster never actually said it, though. I don’t make assumptions. And resorting to rhetorical cliches such as “no one alive” and “the adults” does not change that. So it sounds like you’re the one battling imaginary text.

You make ridiculous, illogical assertions, and just attack, attack, attack. It’s so tiresome. You have been answered respectfully and reasonably by multiple posters, and it’s insufficient to get you to post like a grown-up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before the yearbooks could be scrubbed someone had the foresight to save the info...

WHY CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOKS WERE SCRUBBED: Faculty Approved Racism, Binge Drinking and Promiscuity

http://www.headlineoftheday.com/2018/09/21/why-christine-blasey-fords-high-school-yearbooks-were-scrubbed-faculty-approved-racism-binge-drinking-and-promiscuity/

Sorry, I should clarify that I meant to say that this is the post that will be censored because only the Georgetown Prep yearbooks (not the Holton yearbooks) are fair game in this Kafka-esque Journalistic world we now live in. I should also add that it is the Democrats, especially Diane Feinstein, who have ruined this poor woman’s life.

It won’t be scrubbed, as this has been posted multiple times from a different right wing source.

The distinction is that Kav’s yearbook page showed his personal references; his athletic details,’and then his choice to celebrate high school by remembering not just beach week but kegs, two -man on one woman threesomes, anal sex, and partying. Ford was not responsible for the entire goddamned yearbook and the pages you’re trying to slime her with weren’t her personal pages. But you know that of course.

Point taken, though I have not read through this entire thread so I don’t know what has and has not been posted. I was only trying to point out the culture at Holton as a back-drop to the accusation, a culture which definitely does not fit the narrative here. But let’s be honest, this is really not about the accuser’s allegation, this is politics plain and simple. Feinstein and the Democrats could care less about this woman, but if she is a cudgel with which to derail a Trump nomination and appease the Democratic base in advance of the midterms, so be it. The irony is that if Kavanaugh went down, Trump would nominate a similar candidate in his place, maybe even a woman.

If we want to talk about abuse, the Keith Ellison case is revealing. Oh wait, I forgot that Keith Ellison is the chairman of the democratic national committee; silly me!

Since when is a culture at an institution akin to everyone in that institution following it? Do you have inside information to Trump's thinking? Do you know if he is going to nominate Keith Ellison for Supreme Court if Kavanaugh's nomination fails to go through?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What man has 65 or so women poised to vouch for his character when called upon?

Every member of the country club is willing to vouch for him, no questions asked m

The picture of the group kind of looked like what I assume most of the women who post here about private schools look like.

Link? What pic, just curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually it is confirmed now that Raj Shah called operatives about the story and the name, so it did come from the White House.

Can you cite a source?