Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic Bashing

Lame. Nobody gives a crap that he's catholic. Biden's catholic, too. Did you know that? But who cares.

What we're bashing him for is that he is a drunk, a liar, was unable to control himself around women, is likely financially compromised, and that he thoroughly lacks the moral turpitude to sit on the Supreme Court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.

She told her therapist about an experience she had. She did not mention that it was Kavanaugh. She did not tell multiple people. Had she done so, they would have brought them forward.
She said she had two doors because of the experience==turns out that was not true.
Her longtime "best friend" had no memory of the story.
Her "beach friend" in whom she confided turned out to be an old rommate who worked for the FBI. The one that the old boyfriend said she helped prep for the lie detector test for her FBI interview. She said she knew nothing about lie detector tests.
She said she was afraid to fly and could not come to DC at first--turns out she is well-traveled. Flies frequently.

This was a "hail mary" and it did not work.
Go back to attacking Thomas. Let's see how that works out for you.

Nope, hun. There was a LOT more than that. You aren't telling the FULL story, and are leaving a ton of inconvenient facts out. Ford was also far more credible than Bart "I LIKE BEER" O'Kavanaugh. And a lot more credible than you, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation hearings. If proved that he lied during these hearings, then he can be impeached. Fat chance, I know but it will be a lot more than a ripple.

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-documentary-sundance-1235495305/amp/

And, if Ford lied can she be prosecuted? Because I believe that is much more likely.

Ford clearly lied. I watched her testimony and she showed all signs of lying.

Are you a forensic psychiatrist? If so I’d love to hear more. If not then you are a fool for posting this.

Cute.

No, I'm not a "forensic psychiatrist" but someone trained in a much more relevant discipline.

Ford was clearly lying. She was making things up about her lie-detector test -- it was obvious.

+1

She looked insane and hysterical while testifying. Supposedly she is doctor? No way in hell she is a real doctor. It's unbelievable that some people who claim to be critical thinkers believed her. I've come to the conclusion that anyone who is ideological is incapable of being objective.

Yeah, but It's funny that sporty, ambitious Brett didn't get laid, let alone have a relationship with a woman, until he was pressing 30. Probably explains why he was so titillated when he was doing his one-handed "investigating" of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky as a smarmy Republican foot solider in the 90s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation hearings. If proved that he lied during these hearings, then he can be impeached. Fat chance, I know but it will be a lot more than a ripple.

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-documentary-sundance-1235495305/amp/

And, if Ford lied can she be prosecuted? Because I believe that is much more likely.

Ford clearly lied. I watched her testimony and she showed all signs of lying.

Are you a forensic psychiatrist? If so I’d love to hear more. If not then you are a fool for posting this.

Cute.

No, I'm not a "forensic psychiatrist" but someone trained in a much more relevant discipline.

Ford was clearly lying. She was making things up about her lie-detector test -- it was obvious.

+1

She looked insane and hysterical while testifying. Supposedly she is doctor? No way in hell she is a real doctor. It's unbelievable that some people who claim to be critical thinkers believed her. I've come to the conclusion that anyone who is ideological is incapable of being objective.

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is a proven liar. When he was asked about Roe, he said it had the weight of stare decisis, having precedent upon precedent.

Then he threw stare decisis and precedent upon precedent right out the window.

Pay no attention to the Kavanaugh fanboi here, they are only trying to gaslight and mislead.

Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.

She told her therapist about an experience she had. She did not mention that it was Kavanaugh. She did not tell multiple people. Had she done so, they would have brought them forward.
She said she had two doors because of the experience==turns out that was not true.
Her longtime "best friend" had no memory of the story.
Her "beach friend" in whom she confided turned out to be an old rommate who worked for the FBI. The one that the old boyfriend said she helped prep for the lie detector test for her FBI interview. She said she knew nothing about lie detector tests.
She said she was afraid to fly and could not come to DC at first--turns out she is well-traveled. Flies frequently.

This was a "hail mary" and it did not work.
Go back to attacking Thomas. Let's see how that works out for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.

She told her therapist about an experience she had. She did not mention that it was Kavanaugh. She did not tell multiple people. Had she done so, they would have brought them forward.
She said she had two doors because of the experience==turns out that was not true.
Her longtime "best friend" had no memory of the story.
Her "beach friend" in whom she confided turned out to be an old rommate who worked for the FBI. The one that the old boyfriend said she helped prep for the lie detector test for her FBI interview. She said she knew nothing about lie detector tests.
She said she was afraid to fly and could not come to DC at first--turns out she is well-traveled. Flies frequently.

This was a "hail mary" and it did not work.
Go back to attacking Thomas. Let's see how that works out for you.

+100
They refuse to acknowledge the facts that have been repeatedly thrown in their faces. I wonder what it's like to live with people who are so sure of themselves, yet so relentlessly stupid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.

She told her therapist about an experience she had. She did not mention that it was Kavanaugh. She did not tell multiple people. Had she done so, they would have brought them forward.
She said she had two doors because of the experience==turns out that was not true.
Her longtime "best friend" had no memory of the story.
Her "beach friend" in whom she confided turned out to be an old rommate who worked for the FBI. The one that the old boyfriend said she helped prep for the lie detector test for her FBI interview. She said she knew nothing about lie detector tests.
She said she was afraid to fly and could not come to DC at first--turns out she is well-traveled. Flies frequently.

This was a "hail mary" and it did not work.
Go back to attacking Thomas. Let's see how that works out for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.

She told her therapist about an experience she had. She did not mention that it was Kavanaugh. She did not tell multiple people. Had she done so, they would have brought them forward.
She said she had two doors because of the experience==turns out that was not true.
Her longtime "best friend" had no memory of the story.
Her "beach friend" in whom she confided turned out to be an old rommate who worked for the FBI. The one that the old boyfriend said she helped prep for the lie detector test for her FBI interview. She said she knew nothing about lie detector tests.
She said she was afraid to fly and could not come to DC at first--turns out she is well-traveled. Flies frequently.

This was a "hail mary" and it did not work.
Go back to attacking Thomas. Let's see how that works out for you.

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is a proven liar. When he was asked about Roe, he said it had the weight of stare decisis, having precedent upon precedent.

Then he threw stare decisis and precedent upon precedent right out the window.

Pay no attention to the Kavanaugh fanboi here, they are only trying to gaslight and mislead.

Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is a proven liar. When he was asked about Roe, he said it had the weight of stare decisis, having precedent upon precedent.

Then he threw stare decisis and precedent upon precedent right out the window.

Pay no attention to the Kavanaugh fanboi here, they are only trying to gaslight and mislead.

Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I enjoy ragging on him as much as the next person, and I assume this is one of the lies he told but about this I do not care. I care that he was credibly accused of multiple sexual assaults, that his wasn’t investigated and that he is likely to be as corrupt as, though in a different way than, Clarence Thomas.

No. None brought forward were credible. Which one do you think was credible?

How do we know they weren't credible? There was barely even any meaningful investigation into any of it.
It's not particularly compelling or credible to say they weren't credible.

There was plenty of investigation.

The Yale thing was denied by others present at the party.
The sailboat thing was quickly debunked. Remember, Whitehouse brought that forward.
the Ford thing was investigated ad infinitum. Nothing she said was corroborated. She lied.

Ford told multiple people about the incident many many years prior to Kavanaugh's nomination. Sorry but that isn't going away. Your repeated narrative that it was a lie manufactured to sabotage Kavanaugh's bid to get on SCOTUS is a complete fail for that fact alone. You aren't convincing me, nor are you convincing many other posters here. You are just wasting your time.