It's good to see that there's at least one ethical Republican.

Flake is certainly capable of exercising his right and voting as he sees fit.

Kavanaugh's confirmation is a done deal.

Kavanaugh's confirmation is a done deal.

So you think attempted rape and perjury are good traits to have for a supreme court justice? Those are some pretty low standards. 

Like I have stated, I don't get all worked up over 30+-year-old he said/she said bullshit.

There is already enough folks becoming unhinged over it.

I think it's a pretty low standard to say someone has attempted rape with no actual evidence.

So, we'll give hiom a first class trial and hang him as soon as it's over....no need for none of that 'innocent until proven guilty' crap either.

Do you find it at all suspect that for how many years this person never came forward, never during any of the other confirmation hearings and all, and the 'eyewitness' says it never happened.....does that give you pause at all, or just damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead?

So, we'll give hiom a first class trial and hang him as soon as it's over....no need for none of that 'innocent until proven guilty' crap either. Do you find it at all suspect that for how many years this person never came forward, never during any of the other confirmation hearings and all, and the 'eyewitness' says it never happened.....does that give you pause at all, or just damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead?

I find it interesting how you guys defend the hell out of Kavanaugh in this situation and, then in another seed condemn long time FBI agents as a part of the "deep state" for texting.

Are you having troubles with reading comprehension?

Where exactly did I defend Judge Kavanaugh?  Let's try this to help you understand:

The FBI Lovers texting:

proved ; proved or proven play <!-- \ ˈprü-vən , British also ˈprō- \ ; proving play <!-- \ ˈprü-viŋ \

You mean other than the poly9 that she passed? 

She passed a polygraph examination. So where is the false part?

She said something about it in 2012 when she was in therapy with her husband...LONG before brett was even considered. 

Polygraph test results are not foolproof.

Where exactly did I defend Judge Kavanaugh?  Let's try this to help you understand: The FBI Lovers texting:

Maybe we should start with your last post on here, you know the one I referenced in my last post,

Do you find it at all suspect that for how many years this person never came forward, never during any of the other confirmation hearings and all, and the 'eyewitness' says it never happened.....does that give you pause at all, or just damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead?

It would seem that you are defending Kavanaugh or, are you simply whining that Trump's nominee is being accused of attempted rape? It's one of the two, which one?

As far as the "FBI lovers", there is no proof that the texting they did in any way interfered with their jobs or, that they tried to interfere in the election, that is pure speculation on the part of Devin Nunes and, his buddies and, that is why Strzok's lawyer is filing a suit against the DOJ for wrongful separation.

There is at LEAST as much proof that the two FBI lovers' little affair affected their work as there is of Kavanaugh raping or even attempting to rape someone.

It is sheer speculation that anything at all happened at the party.

Once again, allegation vs. proven.

Then there are all the other times he was investigated, confirmed, etc.  Since around 2003?  oh and the 20 or more years before that?  But just happens when he is nominated top SCOTUS.  And oh yeah, she is a fringe LWNJ professor in California.  Convenient.....

So, you are having comprehension issues.  Got it.

I have defended no one.  I am defending our American system of justice - Innocent until proven Guilty and I don't believe that someone, 30 years on, with plenty of opportunities before hand suddenly had an epihany to make an accusation and it just happens after he was nominated to SCOTUS, vetted for weeks, sat through hearings vistually unscathed.  That stinks only of opportunism - funny, the woman in question is a Left Winger Professor in California, but besides that......and he has had confirmation hearings before this set.

.....the FBI Agent and lawyer were having an illicit affair-obviously someone broke their marital vows-what else are they willing to do?  As a person with a security clearance, your job depends on your trustworthiness (among other things) and they both had demonstrated that they cannot be trusted.

Innocent until proven Guilty and I don't believe that someone, 30 years on, with plenty of opportunities before hand suddenly had an epihany to make an accusation and it just happens after he was nominated to SCOTUS, vetted for weeks, sat through hearings vistually unscathed.  That stinks only of opportunism - funny, the woman in question is a Left Winger Professor in California, but besides that......and he has had confirmation hearings before this set.

And, you say you aren't defending Kavanaugh, sure looks like it from here. In fact, it looks like you are on the verge of slut shaming her, how long before you quit calling her a "Left Wing Professor in California" to saying she was probably asking for it? Here's some points for you, One, she took a polygraph about this and, passed, two, she brought this up in therapy with her husband present years ago and, she used Kavanaugh's name, she said in that session that if she came forward with this that his friends and, associates would probably try to smear her name, (looks like you guys are off to a good start there), you and, others on here have done everything you can to smear her before she has even had a chance to tell her side of what happened in front of Congress, you have tried your best, all of you to find her guilty of lying without any evidence in the court of public opinion.

And you have convicted Kavanaugh on FAR less evidence.

Actually, no evidence at all. We know how a large percentage of liberal. [deleted]

Um, the Kavanaugh accusations are nothing but hearsay and foggy memory with no physical evidence.

The FBI texts are concrete evidence of bias of investigators of one candidate over the other.

Get the difference?

She said something about it in 2012

Kavanaugh was a federal judge, and had been one since 2003, when she made her statements. She said she was afraid he would one day be a Supreme Court Nominee. Seems a little too convenient of this "fear" now that he is a nominee.  Why was she not concerned that he was a federal judge then, or would become one in 2003

Polygraph machines are notoriously inaccurate.

aetv

The FBI texts are concrete evidence of bias of investigators of one candidate over the other.

Not so, the texts that were found showed that the two people involved also texted about other candidates, including Hillary and, most of them were talking how bad each candidate was. To me it is just two Americans expressing their distaste for the candidates, we are allowed to do that in this country no matter who we work for.

I do find it interesting that you are alright with someone who is accused of attempted rape being considered for the job on the SCOTUS so, it is alright with you to confirm someone who might have no moral fiber to be justice in the top court of the country? Of course, that means we would have two such justices on the court, both from the conservative side of the court, Justice Thomas being the other.

Okay, here's an example for you, since you don't seem to get it.

What if I made an allegation that 45 years ago, you molested me when I was a child?  Should you lose any opportunity?  I might have mentioned it to a counselor 5 years ago.  Should you be pillioried for that?  You have no record of ever doing anything like that, but still it's an allegation.  It's been 45 years and I've never said anything, but am now.

Does this seem fair to you?

It wasn't 45 years ago.  It was 30 some years ago.  

LOL, first, I would find your accusation funny and, second I wouldn't be considered for the SCOTUS job, I've never taken law. I would have my attorney ask you specific questions about were I was what I was wearing and, most importantly, in my opinion, were was my wife at the time. 1980 was a very memorable time for me, I have documented evidence of what I was doing at that time and, the government has copies of it.

specific questions about were I was what I was wearing and,

You do realize that Ford can't even peg the year it happened. Early 80's maybe 1982. Not sure when though.

I can peg my 1st sexual experience, albeit there was no rape involved. Just as I'm sure anyone who isn't making shit up could.

As far as a lie detector test goes that doesn't mean squat in my book. I know plenty of people who believe their own lies.  

You do realize that Ford can't even peg the year it happened. Early 80's maybe 1982. Not sure when though.

I can peg my 1st sexual experience, albeit there was no rape involved. Just as I'm sure anyone who isn't making shit up could.

As far as a lie detector test goes that doesn't mean squat in my book. I know plenty of people who believe their own lies.

So, it's ok with you if a person accused of a crime gets on the SCOTUS as an associate justice without clearing his name. Got it.

The next time an article comes up were a woman accuses someone from the "left" of sexual harassment or, something similar, remember this moment.

So, it's ok with you if a person accused of a crime gets on the SCOTUS as an associate justice without clearing his name. Got it.

Describe in detail what series of events could "clear his name" in your mind.

The point here is that no matter what happens, liberals are not going to believe he didn't do it.  They WANT it to be true.  

Describe in detail what series of events could "clear his name" in your mind. The point here is that no matter what happens, liberals are not going to believe he didn't do it.  They WANT it to be true.

How about we start with a fair hearing for Dr. Ford, she has requested the right to bring witness's to the hearing, that has been denied, she's requested that the FBI be allowed to look into her claim, that has been denied and, before you try to claim that the FBI doesn't do that, they've already said that they would if Trump requested it, Trump has not requested it, why.

Please, what witnesses does she POSSIBLY have? 

According to her, she was alone in the room with Kavanaugh and his friend.

Kavanaugh's friend doesn't recall it at all.

That leaves Ford and Kavanaugh.

The Republicans don't want Mark Judge to testify because he would be a pandora's box of information about the bad behavior of Kavanaugh in the time period of Ford's allegation. 

Judge says he doesn't remember anything happening.

Now what?

Please, what witnesses does she POSSIBLY have? 

According to her, she was alone in the room with Kavanaugh and his friend.

Kavanaugh's friend doesn't recall it at all.

That leaves Ford and Kavanaugh.

IF this is the case then why is Grassley so intent on not getting the FBI involved? He, Grassley was all for the FBI being involved in the Hill/Thomas hearing but, now, for some reason he doesn't want them looking into this, what is he afraid of?

I have explained how the FBI investigation would go.

They would interview Ford. She would make allegations.

They will interview Kavanaugh, and he will deny the allegations.

Kavanaugh's friend already says he doesn't remember anything about any alleged rape.

I have explained how the FBI investigation would go.

They would interview Ford. She would make allegations.

They will interview Kavanaugh, and he will deny the allegations.

Kavanaugh's friend already says he doesn't remember anything about any alleged rape.

You forget, Mark Judge is a writer, he has written books on his drug and, alcohol addictions, very vivid story's about his time as an addict and, in one of those books, maybe more he mentions Kavanaugh, what else does he say in those books, I think the FBI would be interested in knowing what is there.

IF this is the case then why is Grassley so intent on not getting the FBI involved? He, Grassley was all for the FBI being involved in the Hill/Thomas hearing but, now, for some reason he doesn't want them looking into this, what is he afraid of?

If this is all they have, why freaking bother?

LMAO!

Sounds more like a fantasyland fishing trip to me!

pssst….something stole your bait, and all you got left is an empty hook!

Sounds more like a fantasyland fishing trip to me! pssst….something stole your bait, and all you got left is an empty hook!

As your hero says, "We'll see."

Yep, Ford testifies on Wednesday, Kavanaugh again on Thursday, vote on Friday.

How about we start with a fair hearing for Dr. Ford,

Don't tell us how it starts.  Tell us how it finishes.  What would need to happen for you to believe that Kavanaugh is innocent?

Don't tell us how it starts.  Tell us how it finishes.  What would need to happen for you to believe that Kavanaugh is innocent?

IMO, it might already be too late for that. Kavanaugh's supporters in the Senate have already killed the idea that Ford will receive a fair hearing through their statements, key words that were used, "she's lying", she's confused, she's mistaken, they seem through these key words, confused and, mistaken to believe that she was assaulted at the part but, they are trying to say there is no way it could have been Kavanaugh who did it to her. You talk to any rape survivor and, they will tell you that they remember the rapists face and, even how he smelled, they may not remember time and, date but, they remember what they looked like and, who they were.

Well, considering all the witnesses she has named don't ever recall this happening and one is denying ever attending a party where Kavanaugh was at; and the story about the party and attack keeps changing from FOUR boys were attacking to FOUR boys were at the party and TWO attacked me to THREE boys were at the party with ONE girl; what should we call Ford?

IMO, it might already be too late for that.

At least you are honest.  It's an increasingly rare commodity.

Kavanaugh's supporters in the Senate have already killed the idea that Ford will receive a fair hearing through their statements, key words that were used, "she's lying", she's confused, she's mistaken, they seem through these key words, confused and, mistaken to believe that she was assaulted at the part but, they are trying to say there is no way it could have been Kavanaugh who did it to her. You talk to any rape survivor and, they will tell you that they remember the rapists face and, even how he smelled, they may not remember time and, date but, they remember what they looked like and, who they were.

I have a few thoughts. 

1. She's not a rape victim.  She doesn't even claim to be a rape victim.
2. The lack of details is contributing to the impression that she's confused. 
3. Your language seems to indicate you presume he did it.  Most liberals seem to be convinced he did it.
4. The only evidence we have against Kavanaugh is her word, with very spotty details. 
5. Nobody has mentioned that she stands to gain a great deal from these accusations.  She will be a liberal and female talk show rock-star, there will be a book deal and speaking engagements. 
6. Neither one of them is going to get anything remotely resembling a fair hearing.  There is nothing she's going to say that will convince any conservative he's guilty, and there is nothing he can say that will convince any liberal he's innocent.

I have a few thoughts. 

1. She's not a rape victim.  She doesn't even claim to be a rape victim.
2. The lack of details is contributing to the impression that she's confused. 
3. Your language seems to indicate you presume he did it.  Most liberals seem to be convinced he did it.
4. The only evidence we have against Kavanaugh is her word, with very spotty details. 
5. Nobody has mentioned that she stands to gain a great deal from these accusations.  She will be a liberal and female talk show rock-star, there will be a book deal and speaking engagements. 
6. Neither one of them is going to get anything remotely resembling a fair hearing.  There is nothing she's going to say that will convince any conservative he's guilty, and there is nothing he can say that will convince any liberal he's innocent.

A rape victim can be anyone who had a sexual assault perpetrated on them even if that assault was unsuccessful, you seem to have glossed over the facts that I put in my comment, namely this,

You talk to any rape survivor and, they will tell you that they remember the rapists face and, even how he smelled, they may not remember time and, date but, they remember what they looked like and, who they were.

These specific details are what matter to the victim.

you seem to have glossed over the facts that I put in my comment,

I guess.  I just don't think they're pertinent.

She's asking the Senate to disqualify a potential Supreme Court justice.  She needs to have a very thorough set of facts.

You seemed to have glossed over the fact that there is a LOT of money in this for her.

You seemed to have glossed over the fact that there is a LOT of money in this for her.

Really? From who? How will this magical money be paid? She's a professional in a field of study, you might even say a medical professional. Why would she risk her professional reputation for a little extra money?

Really?

Absolutely.

From who?

MSNBC, Ellen Degeneres, Stephen Colbert, 60 Minutes, and most of all whichever publisher gets her book deal.

How will this magical money be paid?

Appearance fees, speaking engagements, book royalties, possible professorship at Berkeley or some other liberal U.

She's a professional in a field of study, you might even say a medical professional. Why would she risk her professional reputation for a little extra money?

A "little" extra money?   Riiiiiiight.  Besides, she's a research psychologist.  What risk does she run?  That "people will say mean things about her on Twitter?"  She'll be laughing at them all the way to the bank in her new S-Class.

I think we will also hear something unflattering related to Kavanaugh's witness Mark Judge. 

Judge was Kavanaugh's close friend and roommate so his statement defending Kavanaugh isn't surprising.

It sounds like everyone was drunk so even if Judge's current statement is honest would he be likely to remember it since he wasn't the sexual assault victim?

I read somewhere today that Judge wrote in the high school yearbook that some women need to be slapped around.  I'm still looking for the source cause I forgot where I saw it. It'll turn up.

On September 5, he shared this article which ran on the Liberty Magazine website with a Mark Judge byline about a beer-fueled 1985 party, writing on Facebook, “Just got a bit of a jolt from a high school buddy who just called me. This is (mostly) fiction, bro. Nothing to worry about.” The article uses the header “1985” and quotes a friend called Chris as saying of a woman, “She can only have an orgasm with a Republican” among other things.

The article then quotes Chris as saying, “I bet she’s got a great p*ssy. Just a sweet, tasty, real woman lady p*ssy. A Hollywood p*ssy. A cosmic girl p*ssy.”

The article describes a scene at the third week of “beach week,” (with Judge) saying, “We had a ‘T & A’ party and invited the girls from Trinity and St. Anne’s. We’d lie about having a serious chaperone, and they would then lie to their chaperones about it…Chris and I did a line of cocaine in the car.” It describes discussions about hookers and females’ attributes. “We talk and drank, and the party got louder and wilder. People paired off, Mueller and Walsh were wrestling with each other in a fight over the music, and a bottle got broken,” it continues.

heavy

Judge will be useless as a character witness for Kavanaugh.

When is he going to be a "character" witness for Kavanaugh? In what court?

Kavanaugh doesn't need any character witnesses--they have already testified.

See ya Thursday after confirmation.

I wonder if there are other women who will come forward now that this lady has done so.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.  

'The article describes a scene at the third week of “beach week,” (with Judge) saying, “We had a ‘T & A’ party and invited the girls from Trinity and St. Anne’s. We’d lie about having a serious chaperone, and they would then lie to their chaperones about it…Chris and I did a line of cocaine in the car.” It describes discussions about hookers and females’ attributes. “We talk and drank, and the party got louder and wilder. People paired off, Mueller and Walsh were wrestling with each other in a fight over the music, and a bottle got broken,” it continues.'

I bet he and Kavanaugh raped and attempted to rape lots of girls.    

Like Bill Clinton did, for example?.

And after 35 years, only ONE accuser??  Sorry, this allegation will go nowhere. His accuser is a far left agitator who spent the weekend cleaning up her Facebook page so her real agenda is hidden.

WTF does Bill Clinton have to do with this FFS?  

Juanita Broaddrick is a liar and recanted her story.  

I doubt it

I hardly think so, she a liar because she is on the opposite side of the fence? Just like you like to proclaim that anyone of color who DARE talk against the D party is a "token"? They are not ALLOWED to speak for them selves.... they are just "token", Honestly, if I were a person of color, I would find everything you  say offensive.... Telling me I am a "token" because I don't vote like you do and you know what is "best for me" friggen GTFOH with that crap. Enough is enough with this "token" shit!!!! They are "token" because they are black or Hispanic and don't "toe the fucking line", "Get you asses BACK to that Democratic line!!!!" Don't yall know your lives depend on it????? FFS, GTFOH...... People are not "token", they are fucking people who DO NOT AGREE with you..... That is OK

I doubt it, but y'all are hoping for it.... it's kind of sick......

OMG!!! LIKE, he was at a party, and like, I thought he liked me and like..... GTFOH..... Y'all, seriously..... He attemped to rape lots of girls....????? WTF???? This is how rumors get started, Seriously, stop

You sure have your panties in a twist.  Not my problem.  

She is not a liar just because you adore the Democratic party and they can do no wrong..... what about Paula Jones? Is she a liar?

I could have been wrong here.  https://www.creators.com/read/froma-harrop/11/17/must-we-believe-juanita-broaddrick-no

It kind of is your problem....... you are starting stuff that isn't even legit......

I see you withdrew your apology.  I wasn't going to accept anyway.  I was waiting for your next hissy fit.  

that was crappy, I never withdrew it, my computer crapped out and I had to wait for it to charge up again, but I see what kind of person you are just by that comment. My apology still stands and there is no other "hissy fit". Nice "chatting with ya"

Well then I'm sorry.  I thought you deleted them.  I stand corrected!

thank you.... I never purposely delete comments.  My laptop battery is on the fritz. You wernt going to accept anyway as you stated.

I guess I was in a mood too when I thought you deleted your comments.  Peace.  

This is unsubstantiated (and impossible to prove at this point) allegation from a lone accuser about his actions as a minor that have been strongly denied by both people she implicated. 

As a nation, we need to think long and hard about making this a precedent for disqualifying people from their jobs. 

For those out to get Kavanugh, be honest. IF the same allegation was made about Barack Obama while he was running for office, would you deem him unqualified to serve?   

Let them all explain it to the senators. 

Kavanaugh's lies are as troublesome as the event, at least until we learn the details of it. 

What lies?

I can't wait to see her shamed for lying and making stuff up.

Originally, you said all that happened was Kavanaugh and a friend locked a girl in a bedroom at a party. That turned out to not be true. Let's hear the whole story. 

Originally, you said all that happened was Kavanaugh and a friend locked a girl in a bedroom at a party.

I relied on a liberal new source claiming to have seen the letter Democrats sat on for months.  My bad.

. Let's hear the whole story. 

Haven't we already? She can't remember date or place.  The "witness" denies it happened and she didn't bring the  allegation up to anyone for decades.  What else is there?  Its a he and he/she said dispute from 30 plus years ago. 

Where there is one girl there is probably more than one. 

And Judge is an unreliable witness at best. Reading about his past this sort of thing might have been right up his alley. 

And Judge is an unreliable witness at best

Because he writes raunchy stories? Are writers bad people in your book?  What the hell has happened to the left?   Anyone without a "saint" before their name is not a good person, I guess.  

OK, tell us why he is a reliable witness. 

That is Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge. He went under the twitter name markgjudge, as you can see. The twitter account for markgjudge has disappeared, but some twitter types have found some references to him in cache. 

He is not a reliable witness for Kavanaugh. Judge was a birther , among other things and tweeted support for Infowars. Stick a fork in him. 

Here's a google screen grab where markgjudge promoted a birther conspiracy video on twitter

Oh okay. Because you disagree with some of his political opinions he's suddenly disreputable. Never mind that everything coming out about this Ford woman making accusations points to a deranged lwnj.

What the hell has happened to the left?side 

It has become a religion.  Rational thought and reason have left long ago.  All that matters now is the Faith, and whether a person is a believer or infidel.

   Anyone without a "saint" before their name is not a good person, I guess.  

It's not "saint" before the name, it's the "letter D" after it.

Oh okay. Because you disagree with some of his political opinions he's suddenly disreputable. Never mind that everything coming out about this Ford woman making accusations points to a deranged lwnj.

He was/is a birther. Of course he's disreputable. Jeezus. He also tweeted something nice about Infowars. Fuck these people. And he's a chum of your new supreme court justice. 

Do you honestly think we believe you know what 'disreputable' and 'deranged' mean?  Think about it.  This woman is totally credible.  Try again.

This woman is totally credible. 

Only because you want desperately to believe her. 

Liberal definition of "credible": any accusation aimed at any non liberal.

Well, then, trot them on out!

Hey, if there were more, Gloria Allred would have been parading them on television for a week now.

This is the left MO the did this same shit on justice Thomas it is sicking.

Do you mean like this?

She was probably drunk as a skunk and passed out.

What about Kavanaugh?  Was he drunk as a skunk and assaulted a girl and forgot about it?

She was probably drunk as a skunk and passed out.

So?  Is it okay with you as long as they're drunk?

What's OK. It's likely she made up the whole thing.

And you base this belief on...?????

Why is SHE a reliable witness?

Why is SHE a reliable witness?

She has agreed to testify about it, under oath, in front of Congress.

If she shows up at all that is....but since there is NO evidence of anything serious occurring, AND, no other accusations during all his adult and professional life, I suspect the Senators, especially the female Republicans, will not be swayed by this exhibit of left wing desperation, and will end up voting to confirm.

If she shows up at all that is

Why wouldn't she?  She's come out with her identity, she backed up her story about by revealing that she has talked about the incident in 2012, and she has agreed to testify in front of Congress about it.  You currently have more evidence supporting her than not, and too many Republicans wanting to force Kavanaugh thru before she can testify.  That, by itself, shows that there are many that fear her testimony.

People that are lying generally refuse to testify under oath, you know, like Trump.

People lying generally prefer to remain anonymous or wait until the last minute to make their case. It's called bluffing.

People that are lying generally refuse to testify under oath,

Really? Because Hillarious Hillary had no problem with it. How many times couldn't she recall again?

This chick can't even remember what year it was. 

I can remember a lot of life changing things from the late 70's and 80's and I'm older than her.

Also if she wasn't such a liberal nutjob I might be more apt to believe her.

And come on she is supposed to be a educated woman and she didn't think she would have to come forward after making these allegations? Get freaking real.

Because Hillarious Hillary had no problem with it. How many times couldn't she recall again?

Less than half the number of times that Sessions or Trump Jr. couldn't recall.

People lying generally prefer to remain anonymous

She did not remain anonymous.....

or wait until the last minute to make their case.

Sorry, not the last minute yet.  She "waited" until the man, who may have tried to rape her, suddenly was up for a position where he could further victimize women.

So, being a Federal Judge, there's no way he could do that, then, huh?

If she wasn't aware he was a federal judge,  then why would her husband say this?

He said he remembered his wife specifically using Kavanaugh’s name. She said during the session, Russell Ford recalled, she was scared he would one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

The word "story" in the headline is a good description. As in a completely fictional, self serving story.

The word "story" in the headline is a good description. As in a completely fictional, self serving story.

Amazing!  You have come to that conclusion without knowing most of the "facts" about the story. 

Although, I must admit, it does explain a lot about some of your postings.

Exactly what "facts" do you know? My guess is absolutely nothing. All the left has is unproven accusations. She can't prove her claim and knows it. It's just low class character assassination.

Exactly what "facts" do you know?

I know the same "facts" that you know, zero.  The difference I am not judging, I am waiting and watching for actual facts.  You have already decided based on zero facts.

The Left's MO :"It's the seriousness of the charge!" unless it is their guy that is being accused then it is "We have no proof that happened, so we should let him just get the office he is up for."  They did it with Bill Clinton when he was elected President in 1992 despite the stories about Juanita Broadrick and Gennifer Flowers along with Paula Jones circulating at the time.  Then, Clinton as part of his deal over Whitewater settled with Paula Jones for $850,000.  Why don't we give Kavanaugh the same treatment as the Left gives their guys.

After we give Kavanaugh the same treatment the Right gives out.  At this point the entire world has had it with these double standards, or in the case of the gop, NO standards for themselves, let alone meeting what they sow.  This woman is totally credible, that stuff does happen at parties, and definitely did back in those days.  Totally rings true to me, and don't give us this crap about not coming forward.  When you know what women who do go through,  you may have an opinion.  They get their reputations ruined.  Its 2018 and Kavanaugh is being judged by todays standards and no vote until this is investigated, I don't care how afraid the gop is about losing.  This makes it much harder for any dem and Murkowski and Collins, among others, to vote for him.   Follow your own gop rules, let the people decide, NO VOTE UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.

So, what you want is for the GOP to do like it always does: cave to the Left and hold someone accountable just for the accusations instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt as the Left always does to their own guys.  And you show this is all political anyways, since you don't want to approve any nominee until after the election when your side might be in power.  Besides, the rules that McConnell was talking about when he refused to let Obama nominees through during the 2016 election was about nominees during a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.  If we started doing that every time there is an election, then there would be ZERO nominees being approved for ANY office at ANY time.

As for Kavanaugh, if this was true and the FBI missed this in 2001, 2003, and 2006; we have bigger problems than Diane Feinstein holding onto this letter for several months as this means the vetting process for White House staff and Federal Judges is deeply flawed and not as thorough as it should be.  Remember the adage: Innocent until proven guilty?  Right now, Kavanaugh is innocent and as these claims weren't brought up before the confirmation hearing, they should not be used as grounds to disqualify him.  If they are verified after he is confirmed, then use the impeachment process to remove him.  It's there for a reason, and that reason is to maintain the integrity of our system of government.  Frankly, if Congress had some guts, they would impeach Rosenstein and Mueller for the Russian meddling investigation since it seems to be investigating everything EXCEPT Russian meddling in our elections.  If you notice all of the plea deals result from things several years before the 2016 election and any indictments of people for Russian meddling seem to only occur when popular opinion is to scrap the investigation.  Also, the investigation is not looking into the hard evidence that the Clinton campaign through the Clinton Foundation and the DNC both were colluding with foreign actors to create dirt on Trump (aka the Steele dossier) to affect the outcome of the 2016 election.  The person who created the dossier was a British national with ties to Russia and a deep hatred of Trump to begin with, then used Yahoo news to write an article to bolster his claims using the claims he had already created in the dossier.  Any person with an active brain cell should be able to see that something was rotten about the whole deal and the FISA warrants which relied on the resulting circular reasoning from the dossier and the news article.

For Democrats and their supporters, it has never been about Kavanaugh. It is about payback, pure and simple.

Post 6.1 is a prime example.

With reasoning like that I hope you never sit on a jury.

It is about payback, not truth.

It is about payback, not truth.

 

No its about truth.  When I bring up what republicans do it is to remind everybody what standards they have for others, never themselves.  Enough.  I do believe this woman, I don't think republicans and Kavanaugh have been open and honest, they seem to want to hide most of his records (fact) and ram this through before the election no matter the consequences.  For a lifetime appointment.  Don't see how this happens.  Women already don't like his appointment, and this won't help.

You're so right lib50 - it's about TRUTH.  

Ram through? Surely you jest! It hasn't been rammed through, FFS. He was nominated July 9th. Now it is what, 68 days later?

I would expect you to believe the woman, and anyone else who has anything bad to say about Kavanaugh. I expect no less, and therefore am never disappointed.

Who gives a damn if women don't like this appointment? Are you speaking for all women now?

See ya Thursday after he is confirmed!

After we give Kavanaugh the same treatment the Right gives out.

So this is really just about your "feelings".

  At this point the entire world has had it with these double standards, or in the case of the gop, NO standards for themselves, let alone meeting what they sow. 

Which SCOTUS nominee put forward by a Democrat has been accused of sexual misconduct?  How credible were those accusations?   How exactly does a double standard exist in the absence of comparable situations? 

This woman is totally credible, that stuff does happen at parties, and definitely did back in those days.

She is only very slightly credible, at best.  You only refuse to acknowledge this because of your partisan views.

  Totally rings true to me,

It would, though.  Wouldn't it.  Democrats could have produced a letter claiming he sodomized an alien badger from Alpha Centauri and Justin Bieber is the love child, and we would have difficulty getting some leftists to believe it wasn't true.

and don't give us this crap about not coming forward.

Do you deny that the timing is phenomenally, amazingly, and incredibly convenient?

  When you know what women who do go through,  you may have an opinion.

I've checked on it, and...oddly enough.... we don't actually need your permission to form our own opinions.  I realize that goes against the teachings of The Church of The Left, but I'm going to risk it.

  They get their reputations ruined.

It's not actually 1958.  Further, failure to report a crime for fear of one's "reputation" represents a significant degree of cowardice.

  Its 2018 and Kavanaugh is being judged by todays standards and no vote until this is investigated,

That's not actually up to you.  Kinda like the whole "who gets to have an opinion" question.

I don't care how afraid the gop is about losing.

I haven't polled them, but I suspect they don't care about your opinions, either.  It's not as though you are likely to vote for one anyway.

  This makes it much harder for any dem and Murkowski and Collins, among others, to vote for him.

I am glad you admit that the ploy is political.

I think you have the roles reversed.  The Democrats never hold their own to account, otherwise Bill Clinton would have been successfully impeached for PERJURY to the Whitewater Grand Jury.  He lied under oath, EVERYONE knows that and he admitted it in his agreement to lose his law license with the Whitewater Investigation.  But, Democrat voted in lockstep to keep him in office despite all the glaring evidence.  Just think about this, if the Democrats had held Bill Clinton accountable, we might have had Al Gore as President on 9/11/2001...

Did you really pivot to "Hillary...Dossier.... Russia....Collusion..".?  L O fricken L!   Give it up, that projection crap only works with the Trump base, everybody else is well beyond that 'fake news'. You really need to remember where this bullshit comes from, straight out of Trump's ass, fertilized by Russian trolls and bots.   Not real.

I think it is time to bring out the year books and let the accusing begin - I am not saying this woman is lieing (not even close to that) .. but wow - raise your hand if you never did something stupid at a high school party - (not defending Kavanaugh) ….. but where is the line to be drawn on sexual assault / misconduct?

Her account of the "rape attempt" is backed up by therapist's notes dating from 2012-2013; she also passed a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent.

I am curious if Kavanaugh is mentioned in these therapist's notes, and why it took so long .. the man has been on the bench for years .. yet the assault only now comes to light when he is almost confirmed as a supreme court justice .. a long time member of congress sits on this letter for a period of time before handing over to the FBI ……. I ask again, where is the line on what is claimed and what can actually be proven - as 3 of they fell to the floor and she was able to free herself..

At what point does one say  'this is a step to far' .. is what someone may or may not have done in high school a fair point in time to judge ones life going forward?  Should that point in time gauge who they are today..  if one is to believe the mental health / medical profession the human brain fully develops between 22'ish and 25'ish years of age .. 

This claim may be true .. yet I find it irrelevant in regards to who the man has become - I do not even support Kavanaugh as the next Justice .. but this 'attempted rape' is petty game play … designed to delay the confirmation .. with wings and prayers that it may stop his confirmation... 

There are plenty of books on sexual assault and how it impacts victims.  I suggest you read a few before you go insulting people with no basis of understanding what they go through.  This man already has shown a disrespect for women in his rulings and this needs to play out in public.  Release all his records.  Open up the hearings for transparency.  Stop trying to push this guy through before the country finds out what a douche he is (that is my personal take away).   Let this woman tell her story and he can tell his. 

Dear lib50

I respect the need for drama .. seems to be a serious sky is falling moment for many …  Yet please do not insult me by telling me to read a book .. I have been assaulted - and beaten for resisting.

If you had actually read my comment, you would know that I do not support Kavanaugh's nomination - apparently the need for drama blew past that … this woman is telling her story … no one is denying her the spotlight, denying her a voice is definitely not an issue when a woman shows up 20 some years later making accusations .. seems to be a theme in politics these days (as well as Hollywood, sad and pathetic that no one spoke up about Weinstein before a decade went by) .. 

What specific rulings has Kavanaugh made that disrespected women?

sad and pathetic that no one spoke up about Weinstein before a decade went by

It's sad that the New York Times quashed a story about Weinstein and his sexual deprivations in 2004...or, he would have been out of Hollywood 14 years ago.

14 years ago no one was jumping up and down to be part of #Me too .. hard to say if New York Times had ran the story if it would have gained traction and made a difference .. think any of these Hollywood elites would have come out before now without back up and publicly accused Weinstein?

What specific rulings has Kavanaugh made that disrespected women?

That recent young woman in detention who had done everything necessary to get an abortion and Kavanaugh put extra blocks in her path, very patronizing, misogynistic.  He decided to add a few more obstacles.  He has also made his position on how he'll rule on abortion clear, even as he tried to deny it in the hearing.  Basic disqualifier to me to come out of the gate not on board with full women's rights to their privacy in health.   He will also rule against basic rights, subverting them to corporate and religious rights.  And I think he has lied to congress previously.

Here is something from a women's magazine, which is a reflection of opinion.  Since men don't usually give a shit.  Of course all women don't think like this, but you are asking me, and I've been a female my whole life and pay attention to this particular issue, having grown up during the movement, not taking rights for granted.   I don't doubt he is a fine man now, even if he did do something stupid as a boy, but I don't think this nomination process has been proper.  Too many pages of unreleased records, trying to ram it through so fast,  ignoring the impact on the country and the fact half of us feel our democracy was subverted when republicans denied Obama his (very moderate) pick Merrick Garland. This is NOT NORMAL.  

glamour

I can't help your understanding of his ruling.

Ram it through so fast?

That is blatantly false.

This nomination has not been rushed through despite histrionic claims to the contrary.

she also passed a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent.

One also needs to ask when exactly this polygraph was conducted....this woman was not planing to come forward, her own admissions, until Senator Feinstein produced the 'letter', once again form someone that wasn't going to come forward, but now has.....because of Feinstein?  So, did the senator have the letter, then the polygraph or a random polygraph about this, just in case it was ever needed?

Anyone with the tiniest bit of logic in them can see that there is something terribly wrong with this whole story, but it must be true because 'TRUMP'.  I guess we can all start making accusations against everyone and bring the world to a grinding halt.

Anyone with the tiniest bit of logic in them can see that there is something terribly wrong with this whole story, but it must be true because 'TRUMP'.  I guess we can all start making accusations against everyone and bring the world to a grinding halt.

How about it must be true because the story she is telling hasn't changed since she started telling it years ago. This is the first time someone has listened to her who has had any clout in Washington.

Anyone with the tiniest bit of logic in them can see that there is something terribly wrong with this whole story, but it must be true because 'TRUMP'. I guess we can all start making accusations against everyone and bring the world to a grinding halt.

I found an article that provides more details ...

msn

Speaking publicly for the first time, Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and a friend — both “stumbling drunk,” Ford alleges — corralled her into a bedroom during a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County.

While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Ford said she was able to escape when Kavanaugh’s friend and classmate at Georgetown Preparatory School, Mark Judge, jumped on top of them, sending all three tumbling. She said she ran from the room, briefly locked herself in a bathroom and then fled the house.

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

Notes from an individual therapy session the following year, when she was being treated for what she says have been long-term effects of the incident, show Ford described a “rape attempt” in her late teens.

In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

You tell me what you think …

In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

..

“I think you look to judges to be the arbiters of right and wrong,” Russell Ford said. “If they don’t have a moral code of their own to determine right from wrong, then that’s a problem. So I think it’s relevant. Supreme Court nominees should be held to a higher standard.”

How about it must be true because the story she is telling hasn't changed since she started telling it years ago.

Hi Mr G.

Where do you come up with a story she has been telling for year .. in 2012 Ford allegedly reveal an assault that took place .. 2013 she had individual counseling for said alleged assault (not my words) .. does not seem to me (may have missed something) as if she has been telling a story to anyone that was not privileged communication, until now … I could be wrong..

raise your hand if you never did something stupid at a high school party

I never went to parties in high school

If this is the information Feinstein had and it was so serious and horrifying, why would she sit on it? Why wouldn't she forward it to the FBI? Maryland doesn't have a statute of limitations on felony sex assault. I'm not saying this was felonious behavior, but why not forward it to local authorities in Maryland? Why wouldn't Feinstein ask him about it when they met privately? Why not alert the committee before the hearings? Why not ask him about it during the hearings?

All I can think is that Feinstein had the information and found it irrelevant or not credible. Why should we not all do the same?

Even if we accept the accusation as true, should the handsy behavior of a 17 year-old disqualify him? And before you object to my characterization of this as "handsy," it's clear even from the allegations that if he had wanted to rape her, he could have. But she doesn't make that claim, so clearly, if he was trying to prevent her from leaving or was trying to force her to submit to sex, he wasn't trying very hard.

When Feinstein thought that there MIGHT be a chance at Kavanaugh not being confirmed, she decided the info given to her wasn't important. Now, when she woke up and realized Democrats can't stop him, she cries.

I call bullshit on all of this tripe!

I am pretty confident that the Senator will see through this latest attempt to stop Kavanaugh, and ignore this late in coming and not credible story. From what I have read and heard, this woman is a loony left wing liberal, so that could explain a lot. Once confirmed, I hope Kavanaugh will exact some revenge on his left wing tormentors.

Once confirmed, I hope Kavanaugh will exact some revenge on his left wing tormentors.

yea, sounds very judicial like, from one on the highest court in the land.

but since Trump appointed him, it sounds like par for the Trump discourse

'Even if we accept the accusation as true, should the handsy behavior of a 17 year-old disqualify him? And before you object to my characterization of this as "handsy," it's clear even from the allegations that if he had wanted to rape her, he could have. But she doesn't make that claim, so clearly, if he was trying to prevent her from leaving or was trying to force her to submit to sex, he wasn't trying very hard.'

As the phony piece of shit Kavanaugh was groping her and putting his hand over her mouth - his piece of shit friend jumped on the bed and knocked them off - and she escaped.

Wasn't trying very hard?  WTF?  

Even if we accept the accusation as true, should the handsy behavior of a 17 year-old disqualify him?

Of course not.  But we're not dealing with people who think logically.

You could have stopped at the word think and still been accurate. 

I really need to stay away from here when I'm in a mood.... I apologize for not having a rational conversation with you. I'm in a mood and I'm sorry. I'm dealing with shit on my home front that has nothing to do with you or anyone on here, so to you and anyone else I may have been bitchy to, I'm sorry.... Y'all, I'm a bitchy ass female, it happens every now and then..... 

@tessylo

I do accept.  I can be in a mood too.  Peace.  Sincerely.

I totally understand where you're coming from,  and since everybody here gets bitchy sometimes (some of us more than others) don't worry too much, you have to be hearty to be a NTalker in the first place.  Good luck at home.