BREAKING: Second accuser brings new allegation of sexual misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh

For "many years after" is a wide statement, but what is "many"? He's a lawyer and a judge. He knows what words mean and says what he means.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/many
1: consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite
2: being one of a large but indefinite number

 

I've quoted it several times. Feel free to post a link and quote it yourself. If you were truly a moderate, then you should find a lot of things on this thread abhorrent, not just my post.

 

It's not just the claims or putting witnesses under oath, it's also verifying whether or not this is purely a vast, wide LW conspiracy cooked up by Ford, her husband, her therapist and Feinstein last July.

 

Please do not attack my personal beliefs. Its against the rules.

What he actually said:

“So you’re saying through all these years that are in question that you were a virgin?” MacCallum asked Kavanaugh.

“That’s correct," he replied.

She pressed on: “And through what years in college, since we’re probing into your personal life here?”

“Many years after, I’ll leave it at that," he answered. "Many years after."

So not through college as I said.

Your far left picture is factually incorrect. Do you need a definition on the word "through" as well?

through
[THro͞o]
PREPOSITION

1. from start to finish · without a break ·
   

 

It doesn't matter if you believe he will be confirmed, the plan was the plan. Desperation makes you do funny things.

 

That article sure has a lot of speculation about Kavanaugh that when directly questioned is denied by those the NYTimes is speculating about....Example, they make a lot to do about this "Renate" person, an what supposedly happened with her, but when they directly question her about it there is this:

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

Others questioned by the Times about this caption said this:

"Four of the men who were pictured with Judge Kavanaugh in a photo captioned “Renate Alumni” said it was simply a reference to their dating or going to dances with Ms. Dolphin."

"She and a second friend of Ms. Dolphin’s denied that there was any sexual contact between Ms. Dolphin and Judge Kavanaugh or anyone else in his circle."

So, you obviously believe Dr. Ford with NO corroborating evidence, Do you also believe Ms. Dolphin when she says there was no sexual contact between herself, and anyone in the so called "Renate" group including Judge Kavanaugh? Do you believe her when she signs on to a group of women writing a letter to the Senate supporting Judge Kavanaugh, and that he is "respectful toward women"?

If not why not?

 

Reid is pond scum...

 

Please keep in mind that works both ways. Have a nice day, sir.

 

What plan do you think is in play here? What could possibly stop Brett's confirmation?

 

Still doesn't fall to the FBI. An investigation into the 2012 therapy session, when the repressed memory(?) emerged would be the logical starting point. Reports are that Ford told the therapist she'd been groped. But the therapist doesn't recall, and did not record Kavanaugh as being accused. The husband says later his wife ID'd Kavanaugh. Ford hasn't filed a police report, so no crime there to investigate. Feinstein for her role might be censured by committee, but again the FBI isn't party. Ellison's case pleads itself. Docs and witnesses readily available.

 

I haven't attacked your political beliefs anywhere in this thread. Please try and be accurate when you respond.

 

Isn't that up to TPTB?

 

LOL. Neither have I. Please consider taking your own advice before dispensing it to others.

 

It appears to be up to Collins. If she says nay, so will Flake and Murkowski. The question is why would she change from yea. I think she was a yea simply because she was told to vote that way or be primaried out by theocrats who make up a minority, but a motivated minority, of the Maine gop. Collins said she believe Kavanaugh when he said Roe was settled law. We all knew that was a lie. Roe was long ago subsumed by Casey v. PP, and that case basically held that while the state has an interest in potential life (fetus viability) a woman has a right to control her own body.

We now know that Kavenaugh is simply lying about his past. Did he try to rip the clothes off a drunken Ford or stick his **** in Rameriz's face? People can make up their minds, but personally I'm uncertain what exactly he did. But he was an aggressive drunk whose personality changed when drunk, and he couldn't hold his likker. He went to coed parties in HS where women were not treated well, and he belonged to the clit and tit club at Yale, where women were also not treated as he'd like his daughters to be treated.

And Collins is most likely going to lose her seat in 2020 regardless of how she votes. I gave up looking for profiles in courage in the gop during W's admin, although I have to say both McCain and Romney ran principled campaigns. Bob Bennett was a profile in courage.

 

Why doesn't the investigation fall to the FBI? Beyond the fact that Trump and the gop don't want an FBI investigation. Allegations against Thomas were investigated by the FBI. Allegations that Ginsburg (the other one) smoked pot while a law professor were investigated by the FBI.

 

The point of contention is you're disingenuous representation of what Kavanaugh actually said. Guava by my standards is pretty moderate for a republican, but his political leaning has nothing to do with misrepresenting what Kavanaugh revealed. Guava has posted the verbatim quotation, making you look purposefully deceptive. I won't suggest that your political leaning has any bearing on your deceitfulness though.

 

These are questions that fall to Chris Wray, not Trump. Beyond that, no federal crime is alleged, no assistance by local / states prosecutors asked for, and Rosenstein who enlisted 93 federal prosecutors to vet Kavanaugh stands by his report. Ford can't even prove the gathering ever took place. I would hope the FBI would have more pressing tasks to attend.

 

Disagreed since I posted the link and the quote. Are you saying Fox News lied?

 

The FBI can't investigate a nominee unless the executive asks. This is not a criminal investigation. The FBI doesn't just go around investigating politicans and judges when they like .... despite what Trump wants people to believe.

 

I mean they weren't at the alleged assault. Anything they think they know is just hearsay. That is a 100% true statement as admitted by Ford herself.

Besides, are you sure you want to use the story she told her therapist as some sort of smoking gun? Don't forget: She's already changed the story from the one she told the therapist in 2012.

 

Your problem is that she doesn't remember it. If it was so traumatic and so life-altering, you think she'd at least remember what year it took place in. You think she would at least know for sure "it happened the summer before senior year because my life was never the same..."

You are just being a partisan here. You know it. I know it. You're not fooling anyone - not even yourself.

 

It wouldn't matter if they came up with tortured corpses buried in Kavanaugh's basement. The righties here would say that's perfectly normal for sitting judges and everyone needs a hobby

Fer Crissake he's being vetted to be on the SCOTUS not Video Justice, which I'm beginning to think would probably have him up on ethics violations for the first girls under 20 they brought in.

 

Thanks for the clarification. Correct, it's hearsay. Completely inadmissible in court. However this is a job interview, not a court of law. While lying to Congress is a crime, it's not a courtroom.

Why do you think they are having Ford even testify? What could she possibly say or bring that would change the outcome of Brett's confirmation?

 

Why do you think this is my problem? Do you really think there is anyway Brett won't be confirmed? If so, why do you doubt he will?

 

I don't think they care very much that this is a lifetime appointment. They just want a notch on the belt for POTUS.