Two men say they, not Brett Kavanaugh, had alleged sexual encounter with Christine Ford
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Senate Judiciary Committee has questioned two men who say they, not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Christine Blasey Ford at a 1982 house party that led to sexual assault allegations.
The revelation was included in a late-night news release by Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee. The release includes a day-by-day view of the committee's investigative work over the last two weeks since allegations surfaced targeting Kavanaugh.
Ford was the first to step forward with allegations and claimed Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982. Since then a number of accusations have piled on, including that of a physical assault and several other sexual encounters.
Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all the allegations lodged against him.
The committee has interviewed two men who came forward about the disputed assault at a summer house party. Both told the committee they, not Kavanaugh, "had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his complaint," the release states.
The previously unknown interviews could add a new layer to the evolving saga on the eve of a possible explosive hearing between Kavanaugh and Ford, though it's unknown whether the men's claims are being taken seriously.
One of the men was interviewed twice by committee staff. He also submitted two written statements, one on Monday and a second, more in-depth statement on Wednesday.
Committee staff spoke to a second man over the phone Wednesday who also said he believed he, not Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Ford. "He explained his recollection of the details of the encounter" to staff, the release states.
Both men were not named. USA TODAY was not able to independently vet the claims.
The committee has said it is investigating all claims made in the Kavanaugh saga, attempting to "make sure no stone was left unturned."
In this regard, the committee has also questioned Kavanaugh about a series of anonymous allegations, including a physical assault on a woman in the 1990s.
The release also outlines a number of others the committee has interviewed, including friends of Kavanaugh and those who know the women who have lodged accusations against him.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
228 visitors
This certainly throws a twist into the memory mixer.
Only if you're going to fall for this idiotic last-ditch stunt. It's either gullibility in the extreme or something much less savory.
One idiotic stunt deserves another. The gullible must love company if the left believes these women allegations are true.
If the two men had more details like when, where, and how she fled home they have her story beat. Of course she would have to believe details to refute their claim. Details she can't come up with.
I am not for Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court; but what the left are doing now is just plain wrong.
Oh, gawd.. thank you for another comically ridiculous comment. You must have a million of 'em.
On Fox News, Ford Testimony Seen as ‘Disaster’ for GOP
ByFox News panelists discussing Ford’s testimony during a break in the Senate hearing called her credible, and one -- anchor Chris Wallace -- said her recounting of an alleged sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was “a disaster” for the GOP. Kavanaugh denies the allegations.
Chris Wallace on Fox News on Sept. 27.
“I think Dr. Ford is exceptionally credible,” Fox News judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said. The sex-crimes prosecutor Judiciary Committee Republicans hired to question Ford, Rachel Mitchell, has been hampered by the format of the hearing, he said, which requires Mitchell to ask questions in five-minute blocks and alternate with Democratic senators.
“This was extremely emotional, extremely raw, and extremely credible,” Wallace added.
Anchor Bret Baier added that hearing from Ford directly “is a totally different thing” than merely reading her prepared testimony.
Trump watched the hearing aboard Air Force One as he returned to Washington from the United Nations General Assembly, according to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She didn’t say what channel he was watching, but Trump’s made no secret of his preference for Fox. She also said Trump hasn’t spoken with Kavanaugh in several days.
While the president hasn’t tweeted or otherwise publicly remarked on Ford’s remarks, his son Donald Trump Jr. mocked what Ford said is a fear of flying, a point Mitchell probed in her questioning.
Trump Jr. also retweeted several conservatives who questioned or ridiculed Ford’s testimony.
But Laura Ingraham, a conservative television and radio host, said on Twitter : “Most anchors are saying the accuser is very ‘credible.’ Your thoughts?”
And Ben Shapiro, another conservative personality who contributes to Fox News, noted Ford’s testimony that Kavanaugh’s laughter during the alleged assault is what she remembers best, “indelible in the hippocampus.”
“So that’s brutal for Kavanaugh, obviously,” Shapiro said on Twitter .
Before Ford’s testimony, three Republican governors -- Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, John Kasich of Ohio and Larry Hogan of Maryland -- called for the Senate Judiciary Committee to conduct a more thorough investigation of the accusations against Kavanaugh.
“The accusations brought against Judge Kavanaugh are sickening and deserve an independent investigation. There should be no vote in the Senate,” Baker said on Twitter.
I listened to her testimony (NOT ON FOX) and believe that something did happen to her. She believes it was Kavanaugh and Judge. There is NO corroboration to her story. Even her friend she claims was at that gathering stated she was never at a gathering with Brett Kavanaugh.
I also believe that she has been victimized by Feinstein as well. The six week delay in notifying the committee caused this circus. It could have been handled in a professional manner without all of the grandstanding. The Democrats on the committee stroked her and praised her...as well as giving a few political speeches - but no real questions.
I must say that I'm glad the R's referred questioning to the female prosecutor...at least there isn't any song and dance about how crass they were.
*back to the hearings
Nah, it doesn't.
Is it because you believe Dr. Ford's memory to be 100% accurate?
Yes I believe Mrs. Ford and the other accusers. There's also a fourth accuser.
Also, Gateway Pundit is NOT a reliable source.
They post a lot of fake news and conspiracy theories.
"When I was younger I could remember anything, whether it happened or not. "
Mark Twain
I'm not sure about your reference to the Gateway Pundit...The seeded article is from MSN...and USA Today.
Unfortunately, without having told someone about the alleged assault nearer the time of the incident...or not having written about it in a journal. This becomes a 'she said - he said'.
My mistake. Someone else posted that from Gateway Pundit.
Where were these men before? Why are they coming forward now? Who paid them and how much?
Don't put the cart before the horse. Where was Mrs Ford and her accusers before?
Because Mrs Fords crawled out from under her rock and made the accusations to begin with.
Is that how it works? Must be a left wing thing. So who's pulling the strings on Ford and the other accusers. We probably need an FBI investigation to find that out. That is if the FBI can be trusted to honestly investigate anything anymore.
Her attorneys have written a nice response for her.....with actual dates, details and all that would make the Liberal attorneys case.
Did these mysterious men testify before the Senate Committee televised? If not, why should we believe them?
Ford hadn't either. Why did you believe her before her Senate Committee testimony, which, by the way, is just happening now.
Questions you should also direct at Dr. Ford..........
BTW, in the 80s, down in New Orleans, Diane Feinstein groped me. I just remembered about it, not sure of the year, or the exact location or if anyone else was around, but she should immediately step down and there should be an investigation.
The Attorney for the Republicans just shattered Ford's "Fear of Flying" claim when she said she "Couldn't" come to Washington to testify.
Apparently. Miss Ford has been quite a few places by plane.
Our condolences, does this mean you are seeking our pity, or are you stating a personal conquest ?
That's not what I asked. It appears that Ford is the only one who will be testifying live on television, and phony lying Kavanaugh.
Again, why aren't these men testifying, live, and on television, and if not, why should we believe them?
But you said : 2.1.1 Tessylo:
"Yes I believe Mrs. Ford and the other accusers. There's also a fourth accuser."
None of them had EVER testified in front of the committee before....right ?
I think these two guys are coming forward to take one for the team as they know the statute of limitations have run out for either of them to be brought up on charges.
Ms. Ford never FILED any charges.
No one has in connection with Kavanaugh that I have heard of.
Of course, why bother when you can simply ruin a man with a few well-timed words and not have to worry about any consequences if you lie?
A lot of people (including me) hate flying and yet it's still the only practical way to get places. If this is the best you think you can come up with to attack her credibility you're in for yet another disappointment.
I am willing to bet that Spikegary has at least as much corroborating evidence that Feinstein touched him inappropriately as Ford does.
Why don't you believe him like you believe Ford?
I am basically going to wait for the end results and will live with the results.
Now that makes sense Paula. Thank you!
Yet it seems to have been only "ONE" place she couldn't go. All other places were FUNTIME.
hoping not serious
a 15 year old girl, and a "grown" man and a twisted fantasy...
r surely not what you wish to compare, are they ?
She is very quick to make excuses for herself....confusion seems to be her fav.
You really should try to keep informed of what was actually said and done rather than either rely on the pukefunnel or just make shit up yourself.
When is his polygraph scheduled?
If polygraphs were more reliable, then they would be allowed as evidence in court.
Bet you knew that already, so why do I have to point out the basics to you?
I'm watching the entire fucked up thing as I post. Are you ?
15 year old girl, 17 year old boy.
Twisted fantasies may be your thing, but not mine.
I want evidence, proof, stuff like that---not FANTASIES.
I don't recall...…
It's like Deja Vu all over again ..... Anita Hill style ....
I fantasized about an FBI investigation, to possibly shed sme light and context for all to see, how bout you...midgets and farm animals, cause that's my usual go to as you already know....shhhh
Yet EVERY FBI and CIA Agent is REQUIRED to take polygraphs periodically during their employ.
Oh and BTFW, the GOP ringer seems to think that the polygraph is important. She's asking questions about it right now.
You don't have to do shit.
Yep !
Kavanaugh should have the same Deja Vu FINAL as Justice Thomas too.
You have forgotten all of the republican 'I don't remembers' or, 'I suddenly remember' after being caught in lies? And how much do you know about abuse survivor trauma? If someone doesn't find her credible, they must be watching a different hearing. This is just terrible for the gop.
Here is a good chance at your fantasy:
FBI investigates.
They interview Ford. She makes allegations.
They interview Kavanaugh. He denies allegations.
They interview Judge. He denies remembering anything happening Ford claims.
They interview Ford's friend, who claims to have never met Kavanaugh or attending any party with him in attendance.
FBI looks for physical evidence. They find none.
They look for police and medical records. There are none.
FBI concludes investigation.
Happy now?
Proper authorities?
Like the police in the jurisdiction where any alleged crime took place?
When has Ford or any other woman done that with Kavanaugh?
I am sure one has heard all the proof and facts put forward.
I'm sure many really believe that nonsense but dream on. This little left wing goat fuck may just destroy any chance the left had to make headway in the midterms. Which no doubt will increase their already astronomical butt-hurt quotient exponentially. After 2016, didn't think that was possible .... now i see it may be.
Buckle up buttercups, it's not going to be pretty for the left.
Ms. Harris is now bitching that the FBI wasn't called to investigate in the last 11 days.
Wonder why she WOULDN'T say she was appalled that the FBI wasn't brought in to investigate back in July ! That would have been plenty of time to calm her FAKE bitch.
it does make me wonder why Feinstein sat on the letter, and why Ford went to the press without ever filing any criminal charges.
No "Wonderment" needed. It's being played out now !
No, she should have to step down and be subjected to an investigation. This is straight out of the playbook you seem to endorse.
There is no statute of limitations anymore in Maryland where she alleges the crime took place.
When ISN'T Harris bitching?
Kavanaugh will be testifying, live, and on television...will you believe him when he does so this afternoon?
They provided statements...as for their appearance, since we don't control what the committee does...you would need to ask the committee that question.
Y
is she too tall for your intentions...or possibly, we put u both before horny ole White Male Senators, and may the best explanations win
Ya got me there.
No, I won't.
Neither will I, he is scum just like orange conman traitor in chief.
Excellent questions. They were excellent questions for Dr. Ford, also.
I find her far more credible than two unnamed, unidentified men.
Why do conservatives immediately jump to believe two unnamed sources when they come out in defense of one of their own but react exactly the opposite when unnamed sources make accusations against one of their own? Hypocrisy much?
Possibly because false accusations of rape and sexual assault are very rare. I wonder what it is about so many conservatives which cause them to reflexively slut-shame, denigrate, discredit, defame and retaliate against women who make credible accusations of sexual assault?
Statistically unverifiable.
"Credible". Like naming "witnesses" who have no idea what you're talking about? Credible like that?
I wonder why so many very angry liberals scream about "shaming"....as if somebody can be shamed without their permission.
Ms Ford would not have filed charges as that would have been up to the DA. The best she could have done was to file a complaint.
That's an obviously false comment since there are stats on this showing that less than 10% of such claims are false......and that's a mere 10% of the minority which are actually reported.
Studies show at least 2% of all claims are proven to be lies, and about 7% result in convictions. So the other 91% are unverifiable.
Of the reports that are proven one way or the other, 22% of those are proven to be lies.
So by the standard you cited there's greater than a 75% chance that Kavanaugh is a sexual predator.
Didn't "Judge" Kavanaugh recently rule that polygraph results can be considered determinative by employers in making hiring decisions? Isn't this a job interview? And don't our intel agencies use polygraphs with their employees too?
Or is his refusal to be polygraphed just more conservative hypocrisy?
Kavanaugh will not let himself be polygraphicacal , unless in a sexual connotation
Which of his potential employers have asked Kavanaugh to take a polygraph?
So where are the complaints against Kavanaugh?
Can we expect them anytime in the NEXT 35 years?
Or does she need "more time"?
"Judge"??
Do you somehow for some strange reason doubt that he is, indeed, a judge?
Why the quotation marks?
The law at the time of the event rules.
BTW, there IS a SOL for attempted rape.
Oh and your allegation against Feinstein also has a statute of limitation in Louisiana.
If things were random, yes.
They're not random. Her witnesses support HIS story.
You seem to need to be reminded time and time again that this is not a trial and the venue was not a court room. The lyin' stooge you want to put on the court refuses to take a polygraph test (and after seeing his performance on Thu I can see why) and refused time and time again to call for a real investigation. He's absolutely guilty of these charges. Anyone with an atom of sense can tell this just as we can when ever the Lyin' Stooge in Chief does it -- i.e., constantly.
To use your words: pitiful spin.
You can stop your whining now.
The FBI will investigate, and then Kavanaugh will be confirmed, despite Democratic histrionics.
E.A I Wonder if that then would allow a " Defamation " case to be brought because someone did voice National Accusations, without First filling a " Criminal report " with the right authorities, this be an interesting " Long Running SAGA! "
Amazing they think they could pull off this dumbshit stunt at this point. The stench of desperation and fear of republiscum is overwhelming. They already tried one absurd, and totally failed attempt at mistaken identity so what makes them "think" that they could succeed with a second and even more dumbshit attempt?
[Removed]
Vote to confirm now
There is no way that man will be a member of SCOTUS.
And if he is confirmed? The GOP will lose the house and the senate in November.
They also said that Trump would never be president .
True, but look at how he got there (Putin help) and how many close associates are now in or facing jail. At some point it will all catch up with him, and one day it will with Kavanaugh, and he will pay his price, and doubt he'd stay on SCOTUS if they manage to ram him through. Women for the most part will not be happy if they force a vote. A bunch of angry old white men defending a belligerent, angry and uncooperative white guy, none of whom will allow other witnesses or open up the FBI investigation to deal specifically with these allegations. When Kavanaugh was testifying it was easy to see him as a mean drunk.
They also said that man would never travel faster than the speed of sound.
Graham dismisses two men who claim Ford may have mistaken Kavanaugh for them
"One’s crazy as a loon. I don’t believe the other one. I’m not going to play this game," Graham said on "CBS This Morning."
“You don’t believe either of these men who said they attacked Dr. Ford?” anchor Norah O'Donnell asked.
"Yes, I don’t believe that," Graham responded.
Desperate deporables that's all. They should be fined!!!
Why?
Don't they have as much corroborating evidence as Ford does that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her?
Wells since they are anonymous, that impossible to make a personal judgement, yet it sounds like Graham has looked into it and he thinks they are full of shit.
And a lot of people think Ford is full of shit.
What was your point again?
You know what they say about opinions and assholes.
READ MORE CAREFULLY.
I even went back and reread it to see if I missed anything,'
Nope, not a thing.
It simply doesn't make sense.
Try again if you wish, I simply don't care that much about your posts, especially when they appear so pointless.
Obtuse.
So the fact that they are anonymous and that a Senator on the Judicial Committee, who desperately wants Kavanaugh on the court, says they are lying is 'pointless'. Got ya.
Graham found them NOT CREDIBLE.....
You call Ford a liar because she is a WOMAN and think these 2 jerkwads are being truthful because they are MEN.....that's rich.
That's pretty ironic coming from a woman, isn't it?
Yes, surprisingly so because honestly I thought texan was a guy.
?
Ditto.
No. I know you couldn't possibly be that gullible. So it has to be desperation.
You know what?
You may be right.
They have MORE evidence.
At least they can corroborate each other's stories, while Ford has NO ONE to corroborate hers.
They are not anonymous. Don't be so silly.
I would really appreciate it if you quote me where I called Ford a liar.
Please don't put words in my mouth and attempt to argue what YOU "think" I have said.
That is a classless thing to do.
I am happy to see that you got that right, at least.
Pity others didn't.
SMH
Really? So what are their names?
SURELY you aren't naïve enough to believe that people can testify before the Senate Committee while remaining anonymous, are you? Or that the Committee takes signed statements by "Anonymous"?
LMAO!
Names? Link to documents?
They didn't 'testify' to ANYONE...
Now we are getting somewhere.
VERY GOOD!!
YES, they HAVE names!!!!!!
Whew! Glad to see you have finally seen that!
Next up?
Obviously not since you have yet to cite their names or post a link to the supporting documents.
Do you know who resides at 2716 Live Oak Avenue in Waco, Texas?
No?
Does that make them anonymous?
Get real!
What proof do you have that those two men requested confidentiality?
That is over a three day period...
Now HERE is the kicker...
Grassley referred the guy who contacted Whitehouse with a FALSE allegation about Kavanaugh.
Grassley decries that making false allegations against Kavanaugh wasted their time and resources. But NOT A PEEP about the 'two men' that Graham called 'Crazy as a loon'. Where is Grassley's outrage about their wasting the time and resources of the committee with false allegations trying to attack the credibility of Ford with their BS 'mistaken identity' claims?
WTF are you talking about?
BTW, I could find out if you want to pay the county registration fee.
You are the one that made the assertion...
Nope, they were talking about Ford mistakenly identifying Kavanaugh.
READ Grassley's letter. He sites that his FALSE allegation is a violation of federal law. They ALSO made FALSE allegations.
WTF am I talking about?
Having trouble keeping up again?
PAY ATTENTION.
You say the two men are anonymous because you don't know their names. I am sayong there are LOTS of people you do not know, and that doesn't make them anonymous just because you DO NOT know their names/
If there was a shred of evidence supporting their BULLSHIT, Graham would be screaming it from the mountain tops instead of calling them 'Crazy as loons'.
PAY ATTENTION.
a·non·y·mous
[əˈnänəməs]
ADJECTIVE
(of a person) not identified by name ; of unknown name .
English is fundamental...
BTFW,
Graham was just interviewed live on TV. He just doesn't believe anyone other than the nominee.
He's been fidgeting and be a wee bit disruptive during the hearings, telegraphing his impatience and intolerance of the same, especially during the last hour..
As my bride often says " one can literally hear his eye rolls clear across a crowded room".
( she's most often talking about me
)
Spartacus......AGAIN..... "feels hers and all of Americas pain" on this. He's putting on the record....Pro Ford personal letters. The same tactic the Democrats used during the Obamascare procedure.
Just another tear jerking movie ……. "I feel your pain 3".
Obama had the 2.
Who would have thought all these macho men would have such a histrionic streak in them. They should have put fainting couches in the hearing room.
Why would you voluntarily come forward and confess to a thing like this?
Desperate lying republican scumbags will do anything to derail Dr. Ford's testimony. Besides, it's a risk-free gambit. No harm, other than ridicule, will come to them as long as this lie isn't made under oath (and you can be sure it will not be made under oath).
And no harm to Ford when her story falls apart (which it already has, as none of HER witnesses remember anything).
So Dems try to derail his nomination strictly for political revenge.
Right--death threats and being forced to go into hiding by scumsucking pigs who who are on your side on this issue is "no harm."
Oh the poor, poor woman.
She is a veritable saint, and should be automatically believed, even without a single corroborating witness, because she IS a woman?
Bullshit.
Thousands of people are in JAIL right now without one corroborating witness testifying against them...
BTFW, if a woman is raped in the forest and no one witnesses it, did it happen? /s
There are plenty of people wrongfully convicted later exonerated by DNA evidence, even when the "victim" has identified them as the attacker.
And if a woman is raped in the forest without eyewitnesses, there will be DNA evidence.
Next silly question?
/S
Which will sit in a police evidence locker to decay for decades...
DNA evidence should be stored in a cold environment, something I would expect all PD to do.
If the woman can identify her attacker, and his DNA is found on her, then it becomes a much simpler case to prosecute.
WTF ELSE are police to do with DNA evidence from a rape case???
When they turn themselves into Maryland LEO's, I've take it into consideration.
Oh, just like we will take Ford seriously when she files a formal police complaint?
LMBO!
I'll leave that to Avenatti's client...
Still waiting for that police report to be filed.
After all, she has ONLY Had about 30 or so YEARS to do it, and somehow just hasn't been able to find an hour of free time in ALL THOSE years?
LMBO!
BTW, the Maryland statute of limitations is passed for attempted rape.
Maryland has no statute of limitations for Sexual Assault
READING is fundamental.
I have heard somewhere that the SOL does not apply to victims who were minors. I'm too lazy to check, but I invite others to look into it.
Does that guy ever scare the shit out of trumpsters and for good reason. He's got Scumbag in his sights for bribery to keep her quiet and he's already taken down Scumbag's personal attorney in the process. There are still shoes waiting drop on all of this steaming pile of corruption.
This sounds a little....hmmm...fishy....why would two people admit to sexually assaulting someone if their names were never mentioned, and how were they found and how did you get not one but both to admit to it. I do not know or communicate with anyone i knew in 1980, much less am i willing to admit to a crime i may have committed with them....this is seriously, blunt in your face, smoke and mirrors. Its quite sad.
I find it interesting that accusers are believed as soon as they tell their stories...and this report about two men claiming to be responsible for the assault on Dr. Ford are to be summarily dismissed.
Their statements are with the committee...are they corroborated or will they testify? That is an unknown - for the additional accusers and these two.
They aren't being 'summarily dismissed', Graham characterized one of them as a 'crazy loon', which infers that he at least looked into them and made an educated judgment on their lack of credibility.
I find it interesting that you seem to think that their testimony is relevant. What say you about Mark Judge being subpoenaed?
It would seem that Lindsey Graham is trying to make a name for himself like John McCain since McCain died. However, his actions in that meeting today are certainly are far from how McCain would have acted, and still got his point across.
For years Graham was McCain's 'Water Boy', and I guess now he feels that he can make a name for himself. But, that name looks more like it will be mud no matter how much he cozies up to Trump now.
I will say one thing for him though. He does know how to put on a great show. And the one that he put on for Kavanaugh today in that meeting should get a Noble Peace Prize. However, I am sure that won't be able to happen until Trump gets his.
Just my own opinion.
As you mentioned, his "performance" at the hearing on Thu put an end to any doubt that Little Lord Lindsey was anything but a political stooge for "president" Scumbag.
Follow the money, I wonder how much these two idiots were paid to make the claim. Pretty convenient that these two just happened to surface at the right time, in the right place. And where is Judge? Why is the GOP hiding him from testifying? Weird.
Indeed it would be interesting to know how much those two guys were paid to suddenly come up and say they were the two perps not Kavanaugh. It must have been a bunch to get them to shame not only themselves, but, their own family, and taint their reputations at their own place of work for who knows who long. To say nothing of the legal prosecution they could also face due to the offense. Any why did they wait this long to come forward? Seems money does talk loud and clear when the amount seems worth it.
Just the save the a$$ of a pervert so that the GOP could have their own man in the SCOTUS? After all, it would be their first one. However, I don't think the FBI will buy it. No matter how much Trump, Kavanaugh and the GOP try to cover it up.
Even if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it's really hard to make people who are not blinded by party loyalty to believe it is a duck and not a shark.
Just my own opinion.
2 Go Fund me sites raised over $500,000 this afternoon.
Ford has done the entire country a great service. Hopefully she'll get some small measure of justice from Kavanaugh's defeat, a bit more when he's removed from the DC COA.
What she did took balls.
She'll get some large measure of cash, that's for sure.
Yes. And... Yes.
Next.....
And the two fools willing to take the fall for the guys who won't remember who they are in a month won't?
Moved twice and in hiding? Private security and two DC lawyers who ordered an FBI level lie detector test?
That money is already earmarked or gone.
Dollars to donuts the lawyers set up the Go Fund Me sites....to cover their own asses.
Not like she will, no. She'll be the darling of the leftist media. She'll be on The View, Rachel Maddow, Ellen Degeneres, Seth Meyers. There will be lecture fees...a book deal... Oh yeah. She's set for life.
Not a chance. She'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
Actually they're both doing it pro bono, although certainly the security an additional housing costs and other expenses would come out of that fund.
The balls that kavanaugh, Rump, and even little swish Graham do not have.
Any chance at all that ANY woman accusing Kavanaugh will ever file charges with police?
Or is the notoriety just enough to satisfy them?
Oooo, a new smear tactic: Baseless insinuation that she's being secretly financed to bring these charges. Predictable and, of course, scummy as usual.
Good for her. Kavanaugh's backed by billionaires like the Koch bros. so she'll need the money. Nice that it's right out in the open like this and not hidden. Another testimony to her honesty.
Yeah, Kavanaugh's.
It's amazing to see what the betting markets have done since Kavanaugh began his opening statement.
They gave him a 37% percent chance before his statement to 66% chance as of close of questioning.
Insanely well done.
I can see why even his friends say that he's a mean drunk. Definitely not SCOTUS material. Not federal judge material either.
All things being equal...
Ford appears to be genuine.
Kavanaugh appears to be genuine.
I wish he had admitted to a bit more teenage foolishness and I
wish that he had remained calm in the face of these stresses.
His emotional outburst(s), tears, choking, voice cracking and especially his remarks about the "Clinton conspiracy" to bring him down, were not encouraging.
Should he be confirmed, I now fear he might lose his objectivity in certain cases to get back at the Clintons, liberals, progressives and Democrats.
I don't believe he helped his reputation today with anyone sitting on the fence.
I agree. He did very little to engender either or both of them.
Agreed. He's obviously carrying a lot of partisan baggage.
He was such an ass at times, I wondered what was in that water glass that seemed to be glued to his hand.
Was anyone else annoyed by his Scut 'I just got my ass kicked' Farkus nose sniffle?
Genuine what?
You either believe Blasey Ford, or you don't. She 100% id'd him. There is no case of mistaken identity. If you believe her , he should not be confirmed.
post football game....( great offensive displays = poor defense)
Several pundits on different channels likened this to WWI (tribal) trench warfare and the trenches just got deeper and reinforced.
I attended an all boy private Catholic/Jesuit HS & college in the 60's and can bear (bare?) witness to everything that Kavanaugh has been accused of doing,
participating in,
or not reporting.
That said, most of us matured, turned off the nonsense and became what most would agree are good contributing citizens.
But almost none of us are being nominated to the Supreme Court of the land.
Gorsuch went to the same schools and also apprenticed with Kennedy. No charges, no rumors, no accusations, false or otherwise against Gorsuch.
No questions about how much do you REALLY like beer Mr. Kavanaugh.
No excuses like, "I've always had a "queasy stomach".
Mr. President, go get me another Gorsuch...PLEASE.
He is likely pissed that his elitist ass is even being questioned.
Good commentary tonight by Michelle Goldberg:
What I think bothered me most was what I imagine was his dry mouth,
and after each teary rasp, he took another sip of water and ran his tongue over the insides of his cheeks in what I can only say
reminded me of an old sight gag about oral sex. ( also from high school)
/
Mr. President, your nominees are not automatically approved.
Get us a better nominee.
Because replays of this are on the internet forever now
and we only want the best of the best
and the blandest.
My point was that I don't think anybody is on that fence you described. I think a grand total of zero minds were changed today.
We'll see about that in Nov.
May not have cemented in the panel but I believe you'll see some sort of ratings study soon as to how many female voters watched this.
I don't think this is going to bode well for the Republicans whether they vote him in or not.
Why do so may N joy that fence...
could it be the cold steel posts so many slip off onto as the Truth is again danced around.
She was Far more believable than ole Krazy Kav, he's not right.
Who pulls their outstretched hand back from a man who is attempting to reach some sort of peace with the death of his teenage daughter, which occurred, at of all places, school.
.
I got bad vibes the first set of interviews, he cemented his shoes yesterday.
He's a whiny phony little bitch isn't he?
Yes, I was. What a phony whiny little bitch he is.
I agree with you on everything but the Kavanaugh appears to be genuine part. Genuine phony ass whiny little bitch is more like it.
And to think, she could have come forward with her tales of woe sometime, anytime, in the last 35 years, but chose instead to Only come out when it was certain Kavanaugh would be confirmed, and by doing so avoided the very "circus" she decries.
I expect Democrats to erect a statue of her sometime in the near future if they manage to defeat his nomination.
They weren't changed.
It's a midterm election with a colossally polarizing president. Midterms almost never go well for the president's party anyway. It won't be another 2010, but they'll lose some seats.
What?
She could have told you she was molested in the Gryffindor Common Room and you'd have thought she was more credible than Kavanaugh.
Because you were supporting him two weeks ago. Riiiiiight.
Hey ig..
Ya know that whole out stretched hand being pulled, was an exaggeration of events, a false memory or lie whichever term one things best describes the fathers claim..
I am thinking the father thought that Kavanaugh extended a hand and then pulled it back when he mentioned the death of his daughter in an attempted introduction of himself to Kavanaugh .. because his emotions were running high, video shows that it did not take place as recalled …. the claim vanished from the media quickly..
You seem to be doing your part as a conservative by slut-shaming, denigrating, discrediting and retaliating against a sexual assault victim whom even Kavanaugh says he believes was assaulted. No wonder most rape victims never report the rape.
Are we talking about the same people?
I'm speaking of voters.
Yep.
I don't care what childish fantasies you have about me.
35 years is a very long time, and I find it curious that she ONLY came forward at this point.
I didn't slut-shame her.
Do you think 35 year MIGHT be a tad late????
That's because you're a right winger who obviously knows nothing about the psychology of sexual assault victims.
Maybe you should ask your buddy Kavanaugh why he says that he believes Ford was sexually assaulted? Why did the GOP-controlled judiciary committee state that her claims were credible?
Who gives a flying fuck?
What does that have to do with her accusations, accusations NOT corroborated by anyone, about Kavanaugh?
She might well have been sexually assaulted. I don't happen to believe her attacker was Kavanaugh, and not one thing talked about or witness statements alter the fact that NO ONE CORROBORATES her story.
Wow, that's a gem of understatement, that is.
Well, that goes an order of magnitude more for Kavanaugh's claims not to mention all the lies:
Wah, wah, wah.
FFS, NONE of that has diddly-squat to do with Ford's accusations.
Now, I realize you can't prove her allegations, and I am sure that is bothering you greatly because even you can realize that he will be confirmed when the investigation proves nothing.
-Ford wants an investigation; Kavvy boy does not.
-Ford took a lie detector test; Kavvy boy will never do the same.
-Ford comes across as totally believable; Kavvy boy comes across as a liar.
-Ford has no reason to lie; Kavvy boy has every reason.
This happened, and Ford is 100% certain of who attacked her. This was a traumatic event that she will never forget. I believe her, and so do the Republicans for that matter, they simply don't care that it happened.
They're attempting to Dodge Ford
But they're going to put their Chevy in the levee.
They knew about all these women anyway.
That's why they tried as fast as Mercury to get the confirmation before the Fiat lady sang.
"Never forget"??
SO, how did the good doctor get to the party?
How did she get home from the party?
Why can't she remember those facts?
Why can't she remember anyone else at the party---and it isn't like it was so many to remember?
🎼"Keep them lies acomin' rawhide.."
She remembers getting a ride both ways, not exactly who it was with at least going home. She remembers who was at the party. They don't remember this exact party. For them it was just another party. For her it was something else quite memorable for obvious reasons. Memory of lesser events surrounding a major traumatic one fades quickly. As she quite correctly described, the neurochemistry of the heat of an attack like she experienced cements those details in place. If you had been the victim of an attempted rape and violent sexual assault like that you'd have the same kinds of memory sharpness and fuzziness.
Bull.
She doesn't remember everyone at the party. She doesn't remember who took her there or home.
SHe didn't remember when she took the polygraph. She didn't know if she took it on the same day as her grandmother's funeral.
She doesn't know if she paid for the polygraph.
If she can't remember the basics from a few weeks ago, or a few months, how can we trust her mem,ory from 35 years ago?
Of course. Ford is emotional. Kavanaugh knows an investigation is going to spend weeks to bring us right back where we are today.
Because they're ridiculously unreliable.
Because your personal bias colors your decision. Let's face it, there is very little she could have said up there you wouldn't have believed.
The longer this goes on, the wealthier she'll become. She will be the darling of the liberal talk circuit, and a book deal is probably already in the works.
She can't remember 90% of that event. She can't remember where she was, when it was, and all the people she says were there have no idea what she's talking about. Do you see how you're only believing the parts of this you wanted to believe?
They believe she's emotional.
C'mon, 70% accuracy is not ridiculously unreliable. They certainly aren't a "sure thing" but...the CIA, FBI, NSA and a bunch of other secret alphabet agencies use them regularly in recruiting.
Ford wasn't the one that lost her cool and started babbling conspiracy theories about the Clintons.
He pretty much showed his "Republican side" in this when judges are supposed to be neutral.
I don't doubt we'd see that from the bench as well.
Would you accept 70% reliability for a radar gun? An EKG machine? Your car?
Would it be acceptable if your lawn mower cut 70% of the grass you rolled it over? Would you call your oven reliable if it heated to the correct temperature 70% of the time?
Would you consider an HIV test "reliable" if it was accurate 70% of the time?
Ridiculously unreliable.
Government agencies may still use them. They still do a lot of things like it's 1960.
No, and that was certainly unimpressive. She is the one, however, who has let her "feelings" of one form or another keep her from reporting this alleged incident for 36 years.
If a group of people brought out some woman you don't ever even remember meeting who said you tried to rape her, I imagine your neutrality would explode in a mushroom cloud.
There isn't any history of him being biased from the bench.
E.A Yes IMHO so that they know who needs to be trained to evade them!
Are you fricken kidding me? Next to Kavanaugh's uncontrolled outbursts, she sounded like an intelligent woman telling the truth during the hardest time of her life. He sounded hysterical and crazy, which are words I believe I've heard you use to describe women. He was over the top, more in lines of 'the best defense is a good offense' rather than 'how could this be happening'. Feels like 'how dare you make me accountable for my past, I'm not supposed to pay the price for my bad behavior just because women are fed up - now let me on the court for decades so I have power over women and show them!
Please, just nominate the woman for sainthood and erect a shrine in her honor.
/S
1960's or not, our own government sees fit to use them for high security screening. Last I checked he is a government employee.
His outburst and convenient use of an absurd conspiracy theory gives pause.
Highly unlikely. But that's just me. If it were me and I was sure it was bullshit I'd invite the investigation, And when they were done, I'd personally nail them to their own cross.
No. But I can if it will make you "feel" better. I have a joke about Jesus and Moses playing golf if it would help.
And Hugh Laurie spent years sounding like an American doctor. Stop focusing on what people say, start watching what they DO.
She IS emotional. There really isn't any reasonable argument against that. Look at her actions:
Why? The answer on every single point is "her emotions".
I found his remarks unimpressive. But I suspect had he been more reserved you would have called him "cold hearted", "uncaring", and all sorts of other names.
Again, I was unimpressed.
"Feels". So more emotion.
Do you even notice how it never even enters your mind that she may be wrong? You have decided he is guilty, and absolutely nothing is ever going to shake you from that. If she recanted her story, you wouldn't believe her. He is a straight, white, Republican, male, Trump appointee. He is everything you despise, conveniently packaged and labeled so you don't have to think about it.
It was certainly not his finest hour, and I don't think he did himself any favors.
I doubt it matters, though. That testimony changed exactly as many minds as the FBI investigation will....zero.
Clarence Thomas had an FU moment in front of the committee too.
When one is "Accused" of something, one has a tendency to get a bit pissed off.
Hell....Lindsey Graham had an FU moment....and he's on the committee. Look at the vile stuff about Graham coming out from the left, because of what he did.
Thank Goodness the "Left" is tolerant. I'd hate to see what the "Left" does when they are mad.
All three were justified in what and how they said it.
While KavaLies showed the world an hysterical breakdown. This is exactly the kind of performance a liar would hope to pull off. He dodged or lied about any question of substance.
What's the atmosphere like in Opposite World?
We're well aware that facts play no part for supporters of that POS. And we may very well get some facts from these interviews that were not revealed to reporters who did interviews compared to skilled investigators who now have calendars and timelines to work with. And, boy howdy, is Mark Judge ever hiding a bunch of shit and he's agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigators. You may be right that it will not amount to much. But you may also be quite wrong.
And you pretend they matter to you?
If we were talking about 3 years ago, or even 10 years ago, there might be some hope they would uncover something. But 36 years ago? Not a chance. We're talking about the 1980s. No internet, no GPS, cell phones were built into your car. A "laptop" computer weighed 40 pounds and was the size of a suitcase. Those of us who were sober don't remember what we did in 1982, Mark Judge isn't going to remember there was a 1982.
N good ole boyz will be drinkin Whiskey and Getting HIGH
Singing this will be the day my nomination dies.
oh snap... I remember that song. one of my favorites.
obama wrote that song the day the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter saying they had no intention of consenting to any nominee from him.
ahhhh the memories... priceless
So quitcherbitchen about Kavanaugh's problems. The gop loves this stuff, just not when it happens to them. Karma's a bitch.
me bitch? LOL
Kavanaugh will be confirmed no worries.
have you not figured out your party will sell out your agenda just for a few days off?
cheers
I hope you're right about that 8ball, I really do. I hope the Republican party puts this piece of shit on the Supreme Court. I'm thinking the piece of shit will get rejected, but if he makes it through we can celebrate together!
Cheers!!
Is there any republican BS you don't swallow whole and call "yummy!!!"?
that's the spirit I like to see
Cheers back atcha
not a republican, nothing said by either side in politics today changes my mind about anything
my ideology was carved in stone before most of todays "liberals were even born.
I am an old school democrat who bailed when progressives showed up.
I am one of the originals..... I walked away several decades before we had hashtags
#walkaway
Like a couple folks here i got the distinct impression that Prof Ford is a little MCBW ..... what's she gonna do to get in another one of these rock and roll songs .....
I'm going to go out on a limb here (and I'll take my lumps if it's wrong). I think there's a 3 in 4 chance Kavanaugh will "withdraw"* his name before the FBI report comes back. Here's why I think that: First he knows he did it. Second, all it will take is just one of the various people to verify one of Dr. Ford's recollections (or even a couple of them to independently support separate parts of it) to sink him. On top of that it seems that Ramirez and Swetnick are also to be interviewed and if either one of those claims (particularly Swetnick's, who claims there were witnesses and that the incident is much fresher) gets any kind of corroborative support Kavanaugh's toast. The odds are heavily against there being nothing out there.
*actually it will probably be forced on him by Scumbag and McConnell and he'll couch it in the usual bogus selfless terms that he's doing it to spare his family any more of this REALLY UNFAIR!!! process.
Can't argue with that logic.
I'm going to have to disagree here. Kavanaugh will not withdraw, neither will Trump replace him. Most, if not all of those that were named as "witnesses" before the investigation have come out, yet again, saying what Dr Ford describes, with them being present, is not accurate. None of them are going to flip, even her best friend has come out again vehemently denying she even knows who Kavanaugh is.
As far as the other two accusations, Ramirez claims Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a party, and she admits she was falling over drunk at the time. Even democrats say the New Yorker article was simply a badly written piece and full of unsubstantiated holes. The Swetnick thing is nothing more than a friend of a daughter told a friend who told her story. The FBI will more than likely ignore this one, especially since the creepy porn lawyer is representing her.
Kavanaugh will not be on the court for the first part of October, but will be shortly after.
He sure lies a lot about his drinking. First he barely drank, now he says he drank a lot but never blacked out. (yeah right!) The crown jewel is the lie about the drinking age. Who would lie about something so easy to check? And no one even asked him about the legal drinking age, he didn't have to tell that lie at all. He simply blurted out a lie that painted just a slightly better picture of his drinking, knowing full well how easily it would be disproved. It was stupid. It was downright Trumpian.