Dems are officially a national disgrace.

Do you not trust the FBI to be able to distinguish between whack jobs and credible witnesses?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

Murkowski and Flake want an FBI investigation.

 

Yes they are Demoncrates now cause they have no morals except Lie and cheat to win.

They kept Bork off the court but failed with Thomas and they will fail again.

 

Then Ford needs to provide exact details pertaining to precisely when the incident occurred, and the exact location where it occurred. Only if she can do that, can there actually be an investigation. She is currently refusing to do such.

 

Not if they are partisan deep staters bent upon instigating further trash against an innocent man they deem to be a threat to that same deep state. Right? Hoping your post was sarcasm.

No, she doesn't. This allegation is about when he was a minor 36 years ago. It NEVER should have gone this far. There's a reason for statute of limitations. The more time that goes by, the less able and even innocent defendant can do to clear himself. He is prejudiced by time.

 

Yale, the ABA and the Catholic church have withdrawn their endorsement of Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh does not meet the counsel of 1 Timonthy 3:2 for judging.

"Above reproach, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money, He must manage his own household well, with all dignity."

 

You mean now they are a national disgrace? What about the Indian trail of tears, slaves, civil war, Jim Crow, "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever", the way they run Chicago, Detroit, LA, DC. But now its "disgraceful"? They always have been and always will be this way.

 

Well no physical DNA evidence, but circumstantial is there to some extent. I like how Kav underplayed his drinking during his testimony, despite documents showing their "100 keg challenge," lol. Such a liar, just like his master Trump.

 

Kavanaugh is no innocent.

And the Bad Right are fighting against finding out the truth.

 

No one is.

 

Kavanaugh is no innocent.

. . . and they are not up for SCOTUS appointment.

 

I asked if you trusted the FBI. Do you think they are partisan deep staters? Will you accept what they uncover, if they uncover anything?

 

Jeeze do you expect DNA after 37 years ???

 

I don't think he's falsely accused, but it's not easily proven when the victim doesn't go straight to the police/ER. I think Ford is certain, so much so that she took a polygraph to try to show it and went through hell to testify.

But even given my hypothesis there (not beyond a reasonable doubt), we're actually not talking about destroying somebody, we're talking about not putting them on the SCOTUS. A higher burden of proof should certainly be met if we were talking about removing him from his current job.

That said, the post I replied to was about it being bad that democrats use sex as a political weapon. That's exactly what the Starr team did. And Kav was actually an especially rabid hack in his role there, arguing for more explicit and embarrassing sexual questioning of Clinton. And his partisan performance during his denials Thursday were beneath the dignity of the SCOTUS.

 

That was my point.

 

Rather frivolous point however.

 

I thought liberals were on board with men getting in touch with their feminine side.

 

I think you didn't get it. People tend to expect physical evidence as necessary to prove a case and discount circumstantial evidence. During jury selection I've been at the judge went out of his way to explain that circumstantial evidence matters.

Physical evidence is only likely in sexual assault cases if they are immediately reported. Most sexual assault cases are not immediately or ever reported, but just because they're not immediately reported doesn't mean they're not prosecutable. People saying that there is no evidence or can be no evidence are simply wrong. We can determine whether Kav or Ford are lying about details of their life at the time (Kav saying he didn't drink a lot, as weighed against a document suggesting a 100 keg challenge, e.g.), and then there is the whole thing about when she told different people, and the whole issue of the people allegedly present not remembering it. There's a lot to investigate. It won't necessarily lead to anything, but it could.

 

After 37 years your forensics must become much more sophisticated than the usual tv mystery stuff.

That's what you yourself @LiveUninhibited are perhaps not getting.

The woman was sincere. She had details.

The man was not. He had only half truths and denials.

 

I'll take your word for it.

I am nonpartisan independent -- neither so-called liberal (means liberal spending) nor so-called conservative (means conserving tax cuts for the rich).

Get it now?

 

Forensics can't go back in time.

The woman was emotional, and probably was sincere that something happened back then, but mixed it in with telling herself for years that it was bret that now she believes it to be true. This is how Trump talks about him self and could probably pass a lie detector test just as easily as Ford did.

Bret had denials because he was being accused.

 

Not sure I understand the first statement, but to be clear I was against Kav before the allegations, and am even more against Kav after yesterday. I believe Ford. Kav was just acting like a Trumpian hack.

 

Yeah I get it. You think he’s girlie for showing emotions.

Liberal/conservative is about more than spending or cutting taxes.
Don’t our liberal friends tell us we should be more sensitive, more in touch with our feelings?

BTW, I’m also registered Unaffiliated. Changed from a D when I suddenly became a racist for disagreeing with some of President Obama’s policies.
...”

 

Lefties just dont get it.

 

Poor Obama.

Falsely accused left and right.

History will show him to be one of the best presidents we ever had.

And Lincoln is the ONLY Republican on that list.