Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn.

The NYT has updated the piece tonight to say that the earlier version omitted something from the book. That "something" was that the female student who was the alleged victim declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the incident.

In other words, she doesn’t want her life to be ruined by relentless harpies like you people. I can’t blame her.

Really. Show us an example of a ruined life? All the liars thus far have lived their lives just fine. Making up things and coming forward hasn’t hurt anybody except the accused.

That’s ok. The ruined lives along the way are all fine. Means justifies the end to the liberal mind. A mind that manages to lie itself in some weird loop. Liberalism is a mental disease devoid of logic and facts. This board shows that in spades.

Christine Blasey Ford, Kavenaugh’s first accuser (attempted rape, if you recall). Her life will never be the same because of crazies like you. Meanwhile, her attempted rapist sits on the Supreme Court. I would’t say that his life is in ruins. But you know that - and you enjoy that she will punished forever for being a victim of entitled male aggression, misogynism, and sheer stupidity from right wingers who refuse to even consider that the deeply flawed people that they admire could be sexual predators, conmen, and traitors. If you people weren’t so loathsome, I’d almost feel sorry for you.

One can easily take this part of your statement and insert the words Monica Lewinsky ("that woman" as described by Bill Clinton), Bill Clinton, and Democrats.

Yes, you could. And I think 20+ years later most Democrats would agree. And people have learned a lot about these types of situations and what is not acceptable behavior in elected officials, much less someone with a lifetime appointment. Well, maybe you and your whataboutisms haven't learned much. The rest of us have.

And FTR Clinton would not be electable in 2019.

Anonymous wrote:Let's see how many so-called "journalists" who commented on the original NYTimes piece return to correct their statements due to the correction to the story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swinging dicks at a frat party 30 years ago? I literally could not care less.

+1

That's fine. But, that says a lot about you. None of it good.

You do recognize your narrative has been undermined resembling the separation of the San Andreas fault, right? That says a lot about you. None of it good. This is the point where you say, "Well, that was embarrassing."

Does the first PP actually care about swinging dicks now?

With all due respect, I'll leave that for you to firm up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's see how many so-called "journalists" who commented on the original NYTimes piece return to correct their statements due to the correction to the story.

Who paid Kavanaugh's debts?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's see how many so-called "journalists" who commented on the original NYTimes piece return to correct their statements due to the correction to the story.

Who paid Kavanaugh's debts?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's see how many so-called "journalists" who commented on the original NYTimes piece return to correct their statements due to the correction to the story.

Who paid Kavanaugh's debts?

Anonymous wrote:Let's see how many so-called "journalists" who commented on the original NYTimes piece return to correct their statements due to the correction to the story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swinging dicks at a frat party 30 years ago? I literally could not care less.

+1

That's fine. But, that says a lot about you. None of it good.

You do recognize your narrative has been undermined resembling the separation of the San Andreas fault, right? That says a lot about you. None of it good. This is the point where you say, "Well, that was embarrassing."

Does the first PP actually care about swinging dicks now?

Anonymous wrote:So did we find out who paid Kavanaugh's debts before confirmation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn.

The NYT has updated the piece tonight to say that the earlier version omitted something from the book. That "something" was that the female student who was the alleged victim declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the incident.

such a teeny weeny omission...by such esteemed journalists...we're all SHOCKED at the oversight!

The thing is when I read this story, I thought, "give it 24 hours before they reverse". I can honestly say my heart rate didn't even fluctuate when I read this since the humiliation of the once venerable institution of journalism is complete. I wish the President would find such grace, be less publicly reactive and trust more.

+1 PP here. I agree.

You're a despicable person. Both you and the PP.

Coming from you, that's a compliment. You fell for a scam. I'd be lashing out like a vicious animal cornered also.

Hahahahahaha!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swinging dicks at a frat party 30 years ago? I literally could not care less.

+1

That's fine. But, that says a lot about you. None of it good.

You do recognize your narrative has been undermined resembling the separation of the San Andreas fault, right? That says a lot about you. None of it good. This is the point where you say, "Well, that was embarrassing."