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

[Anonymous]

Wow! Farrow says Ramirez came forward because Senate Democrats came looking?

Any other source for this?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ronan-farrow-new-kavanaugh-accuser-came-forward-because-democrats-came-looking/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who keeps their calendar from 1982?
What teenage boy keeps a calendar in 1982?

Zero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Farrow says Ramirez came forward because Senate Democrats came looking?

Any other source for this?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ronan-farrow-new-kavanaugh-accuser-came-forward-because-democrats-came-looking/

And why the heck didn't the Republicans go looking before they nominated BK? Why? What a mess.

[Anonymous]

They must have known. They do not think it will preclude his confirmation. We will see

[Anonymous]

In the New Yorker article:

After seeing Judge’s denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that “ ‘no horseplay’ took place at Georgetown Prep with women.” Rasor stressed that “under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t reveal information that was told in confidence,” but, she said, “I can’t stand by and watch him lie.” In an interview with The New Yorker, she said, “Mark told me a very different story.” Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated. But Rasor was disturbed by the story and noted that it undercut Judge’s protestations about the sexual innocence of Georgetown Prep. (Barbara Van Gelder, an attorney for Judge, said that he “categorically denies” the account related by Rasor. Van Gelder said that Judge had no further comment.)

Another woman who attended high school in the nineteen-eighties in Montgomery County, Maryland, where Georgetown Prep is located, also refuted Judge’s account of the social scene at the time, sending a letter to Ford’s lawyers saying that she had witnessed boys at parties that included Georgetown Prep students engaging in sexual misconduct. In an interview, the woman, who asked to have her name withheld for fear of political retribution, recalled that male students “would get a female student blind drunk” on what they called “jungle juice”—grain alcohol mixed with Hawaiian Punch—then try to take advantage of her. “It was disgusting,” she said. “They treated women like meat.”

Mark Judge and Elizabeth Rasor should be called to provide testimony under oath. This is even more relevant now with Avenatti's tweets about his new clients. Grassley has said they would "attempt to validate" the second allegation and has totally ignored Avenatti's email exchanges so far. This week is going to be a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They must have known. They do not think it will preclude his confirmation. We will see

Didn't preclude Trump from getting elected POTUS. Republicans just really don't care how men treat women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jane Meyer on the New Yorker Story on CBS this morning...

"We found classmates had been talking about this for weeks and months since July. There'd been an email chain of Yale classmates of Kavanaugh talking about will this thing come out? long before Christine Blasey Ford came forward"

This could get interesting if she produces the email chain.

In light of this I am really confused why NYT seems to be carrying GOP water by asserting they could not find anyone corroborating the New Yorker report in addition to a soft-lobbying push by GOP that Kavanaugh would produce his schedule from 1982 as alibi.

Because NYT and the New Yorker are still competitors in the blood sport of entertainment for the discredited elites of our country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Farrow says Ramirez came forward because Senate Democrats came looking?

Any other source for this?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ronan-farrow-new-kavanaugh-accuser-came-forward-because-democrats-came-looking/

And why the heck didn't the Republicans go looking before they nominated BK? Why? What a mess.

I am glad Democrats are doing what they are sent to the senate for - checking whether a SC nominee is fit or not against all odds (they are prohibited to access Kavanugh's full records)!

[Anonymous]

They certainly should have known about the impending smear campaign. Didn't Democrats form an organization to fight ANY nominated candidate?

Yes, they certainly did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They certainly should have known about the impending smear campaign. Didn't Democrats form an organization to fight ANY nominated candidate?

Yes, they certainly did.

Can you list out all of those who you believe to be lying? Thanks, flunky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe Brett Kavanaugh is the hill some of you cretins want to die on. Good God. I’m sure his wife, if she has had the sense the Lord gave a goose, is begging him to withdraw his name and end this as a story for the likes of Farrow and Meyer to continue exploring. Every single person they have profiled to date has at minimum lost his job, and/of been charged (Weinstein, Schneiderman, Moonves).

BK is not the hill I want to die on. Pushing back against how the liberal Democrats have handled this whole process is the hill I am willing to die on. Liberals would have done this to anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy. Anyone. Trump could have nominated Mother Theresa and liberals would have dragged her through the mud. And for the record, I think what the Republicans did to Garland was wrong too. But this has sank to a new level of low that disgusts me. I don't know if I will ever be able to vote for a Democrat again and I am a currently a registered Democrat.

I agree. Time to #WalkAway.

Which Shutterstock image are you going to use to cover what you are as you join a Russian-invented not-real movement? May I suggest, “Middle-aged African-American man solving a crossword”?

I’ll use this website. http://walkawaymarch.com
Thanks for asking.

A Walk Away March? Bless your hearts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who keeps their calendar from 1982?
What teenage boy keeps a calendar in 1982?

More importantly, what teenage boy notes in his calendar he will be attending an illegal, impromptu kegger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who keeps their calendar from 1982?
What teenage boy keeps a calendar in 1982?

More importantly, what teenage boy notes in his calendar he will be attending an illegal, impromptu kegger?

May be he can also show his calendar that he had no plan on "running a train" on a drunk woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who keeps their calendar from 1982?
What teenage boy keeps a calendar in 1982?

More importantly, what teenage boy notes in his calendar he will be attending an illegal, impromptu kegger?

That was ridiculous. He’s looking desperate now.

[Anonymous]

“We found classmates had been talking about this for weeks and months since July. There'd been an email chain of Yale classmates of Kavanaugh talking about will this thing come out? long before Christine Blasey Ford came forward"

- Jane Mayer