Kavanaugh: 'I will not be intimidated into withdrawing'

I edited my post. No, I don't care for the way you're gong after other forum members. You're better than that.

 

I think the matter will conclude this week. As to the outcome, I'm uncertain.

 

Lol the irony that in reality Kavanaughgh is standing up for men’s rights. You can’t just destroy our lives over accusations man it’s enough already.

 

I'd like to see this verified by the FBI. Why do you think Trump refuses to authorize an FBI investigation?

Just two squadron JAG investigations. One as a Marine 1st LT (missing equipment) and one as a Navy LT (aircraft mishap). I've also worked as a civilian aviation accident investigator but it was a PITA and I moved to aviation safety and security. You?

 

In the end, Benjamin Franklin's advice remains timeless: "Honesty is the best policy".

 

I already have one $25 bet he will be confirmed. I can make a second one with you if you like for the same amount or less. Payable to this forum in the winner's name, so it's too a good cause.

 

Rideon for S2 for 3 years, NGB studies and investigations for 5 years, and went to the police academy (didn't end up graduating- had to deploy when I was in the NG. Decided not to pursue a career as a cop when i returned).

Also assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force during the boston bombings.

My point is, if you're an investigator, you understand that there's very little evidence that this is actually true. This happens ALL the time when politicians coming in the spotlight.

If you really are a libertarian, you'd want to ensure all the facts are in before making a judgement.

The only facts we have here is that she's accusing someone famous of something that she cannot prove.

 

The onus of proof must come from the plaintiff. I have GPS tracking on my phone as well as vehicles plus numerous cameras throughout my home and neighborhood so...

I’m not hearing anyone besides extremists say he should be charged without sufficient evidence, only that his confirmation should be held temporarily. There are however numerous groups calling for his confirmation to continue and that the evidence should simply be ignored as “happening too long ago” or “boys will be boys”.

Republicans held Obama’s pick for 400 days without cause, what’s suddenly the issue with it being held a few weeks?

 

"Backfire"...? . . Be careful, or you may have your post deleted for 'promoting violence'. That happened to me in a different thread.

Still, it would be wonderful if this giant, manufactured 'shitstorm' would blow right back in these radical Democrats' faces -- but today more and more Americans are shiftless, hyperliberal slobs who want 'socialism' and free-stuff from the government. That necessarily means they have turned into lock-step Democrats! And, if an innocent man with a sterling reputation is DESTROYED so that they can get closer to their ideal "sugar-teat" society, then that's just FINE with them!

 

Isn't she testifying this week?...for as much difference it will make;

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/23/kavanaugh-ford-lindsey-graham-837391
Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sunday the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser won’t change his mind, no matter what she says....

...Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, has said Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party when they were both in high school. A therapist‘s notesfrom 2012 reference an attempted assault by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes did not name Kavanaugh (a graduate of Georgetown Prep), and other students have said they don’t rememberthe party Ford described.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Saturday tentatively agreed to a hearing with Ford this week after exchanges with her lawyer, but Graham said it won’t change his vote — absent additional information.

 

So she's a nutball and created her own memories.
Means nothing

 

Nuff said

 

"Why do you think Trump refuses to authorize an FBI investigation?"

Link?

 

Dude, I've repeatedly posted there is no evidence, just testimony. It's pure he said/she said. What part of that is unclear?

While the therapist's notes give credence to the fact Ford brought this up in 2012 and her husband can back her claim that she named Kavanaugh as the assaulter years ago, it's not evidence that will hold up in court....but this isn't a courtroom. It's a job interview and the Republicans have made it clear Kavanaugh will be confirmed. As I've posted before, Ford can bring a video tape of Brett ass ****ing her and he'd still be confirmed. He couldn't even be charged because the statute of limitations expired decades ago. I hope an investigator with your background understands all of this.

 

So you believe it's a conspiracy by Ford, her husband and the therapist? Do you understand that's a felony? Why won't Trump authorize an FBI investigation into this?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-fbi-investigation-kavanaugh-allegations.html
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., wrote a letter to President Trump urging him to direct the FBI to investigate sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

The letter was made public on Sunday moments after the Judiciary Committee announced that Kavanaugh's accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, would testify about her claim on Thursday.

"The FBI’s involvement is required in order to identify and interview all witnesses, review documentary evidence, and provide its report to the Senate," Schumer and Feinstein wrote. "It is not the FBI’s job to determine credibility, but it is the FBI’s job to gather facts. Regrettably, however, the FBI has thus far failed to act."

The pair of Democrats accused Trump of making "misleading statements" about whether the FBI should investigate Ford's claims against Kavanaugh. They also compared the current controversy to the sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas by Anita Hill in 1991. In that case, the FBI investigated Hill's allegations and produced a report three days later, before the Judiciary Committee held its now-infamous hearings with Hill and Thomas.

"[T]he FBI has almost a full week to do its work," Schumer and Feinstein wrote. " ... [T]here is no legitimate basis for you to continue blocking the FBI from investigating this important matter."

 

I understand that. And I must have missed your post earlier. My apologies.

My point I'm making is that her coming forward with this allegation is politically motivated. It's a dirty move by the left wing to use her for this whether or not she's telling the truth.

 

Amazing. As if you have never heard of Biden's rule. Let me refresh your memory. Don't be a hypocrite.

Joe Biden Argued for Delaying Supreme Court Picks in 1992
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/...for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html

But in a speech on the Senate floor in June 1992, Mr. Biden, then the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said there should be a different standard for a Supreme Court vacancy “that would occur in the full throes of an election year.” The president should follow the example of “a majority of his predecessors” and delay naming a replacement, Mr. Biden said. If he goes forward before then, the Senate should wait to consider the nomination.

“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Mr. Biden said at the time. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.

“That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me,” he added, “we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”

 

Its just my guess but two reasons come to mind

First Trump cannot trust the rogue agents in FBI and DOJ

Secondly the democrats are engaging in delaying tactics and just trying to drag out the process

 

Agreed in part. It's politically motivated by the Democrats 100%. They are looking at the midterms. It's partially politically motivated by Ford, but, IMO, mostly psychologically motivated due to her memories of the sexual assault she claims was Brett. Pissed off people often react emotionally, not logically. The logical thing for Ford would be to go home and put this behind her. Even in 2012, 30 years after the incident, it was still bothering her. While getting some revenge on her attacker would be psychologically satisfying, it won't cure her. She needs more therapy.

 

I believe she's a nutball being used like a cheap slut

 

Agreed partially as well. I also think it's possible she's remembering it wrong. Since it's been over 30 years...memories can be skewed even with trauma.

We'll never know the truth.

 

That's possible too. However, why would Kavanaugh's name pop up in therapy if it weren't true? She must have known him or had a reason to remember his name. I remember a few of my old girlfriends names, but not all of them. Either way, we're agreed the Democrats are using this as a political baseball bat to beat the Republicans prior to the midterms. Why the Republicans are falling for it seems silly and stupid to me.

As for Brett, his claim about being a virgin through HS and "many years after" is doubling down and, IMO, implausible regardless of what really happened between him and Ford, if anything.

 

It's possible he was there, it's possible he spoke to her after about it, there are a million possibilities. Was he there? I'm guessing yes. But her word from over 30 years ago is nothing to go on.

 

Has Ford unmasked the shrinks notes for review?

 

An opinion without facts behind it counts for nothing.

There is no evidence she gave his name in therapy. And there is no way you can prove he lied about being a virgin.