Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[Tassman]

That's her lawyer's statement, Tass --

Lawyers speak on behalf of their clients do they not? And Swetnick's lawyer states that: "This lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed,"

The ALLEGED victim.

It nevertheless behoves you to avoid attacking her whilst simultaneously defending her alleged sexual aggressor.

[JimL]

Yep... which brings me back to a point I made earlier: Would a rational person continue pressing a claim when everybody else who supposedly witnessed it is telling them it never happened?

Only if the claim is true. And btw MM, everybody else did not say it never happened, the accused said it never happened, others who weren't directly involved said they weren't aware of it. Well, that only makes sense when you realize that she was only at the house a short time, had 1 beer, and had to sneak out the front door in order to avoid her attackers. But try not to lie when making your case, MM, because, as with Kavanaugh it only serves to erase any credibility that those who don't know you might afford you.

[lilpixieofterror]

It's going to be an incredibly short investigation.

For sure.

[Cow Poke]

Lawyers speak on behalf of their clients do they not?

No, Tass, a lawyer is going to throw his client under the bus at the very first possible moment. Are you THAT NUTS?!?!?!

And Swetnick's lawyer states that: "This lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed,"

What do you EXPECT him to say about the person who is PAYING him to be her spokesperson?

It nevertheless behoves

I think you mean 'behooves', Tass--- Sheeeeesh, you speak on the level of an 8-year old!

you to avoid attacking her whilst simultaneously defending her alleged sexual aggressor.

Questioning her truthfulness is part of evaluating her allegations, Tass. You're eating those "smart pills" Rogue sent you, aren't you.

[lilpixieofterror]

That's why an investigation should have been done in the first place Lilpix. You know that, you're just to biased to admit it. The Republican majority knows that as well, which is why they tried, as M. McConnell said, to plow right through. Besides all that, Judge Kavanaugh pretty much disqualified himself regardless of the accusations of Dr. Ford. He showed himself to be a biased right winger, to be a blatant liar under oath, to disrespect the office and the Senate which is responsible to consent to his confirmation. He doesn't belong on the SC. even if the FBI can't corroborate the accusation.

[lilpixieofterror]

A few high profile stories in the news has no significance as to its commonality. I'll refer you to post #961 for statistics.

Are those the magic words that make truth and reason disappear?

[lilpixieofterror]

Only if the claim is true. And btw MM, everybody else did not say it never happened, the accused said it never happened, others who weren't directly involved said they weren't aware of it. Well, that only makes sense when you realize that she was only at the house a short time, had 1 beer, and had to sneak out the front door in order to avoid her attackers. But try not to lie when making your case, MM, because, as with Kavanaugh it only serves to erase any credibility that those who don't know you might afford you.

[Mountain Man]

...your statements about ford and democrats/liberals are said in the very same way someone with hatred for both would say them.

• Edited by a Moderator • You're seeing what you want to see.

As for Ford's witnesses, I have yet to see a good explanation for why none of them would remember the remarkable incident of her running down the stairs, past them in the living room, and out the front door, never to return. They all say it never happened. They don't remember attending the party as described by Ford. Ford can't even say who's house it was!

Based on reason and logic, there are only two conclusions consistent with the evidence.

Moderated By: QuantaFille

Please keep it civil.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[seer]

So when the FBI come back Wednesday or Thursday with basically the same info that we have now are the liberals here going to satisfied?

[Mountain Man]

And to arrive at that conclusion you must ignore the simple fact that she sought help for the event 5 years previous, identifying Kavanaugh as the subject to her husband. 5 YEARS.

Ford's husband claims after the fact that she told their therapist. The therapist's notes have no record of this in addition to the curious discrepancy that Ford claimed four attackers and not just two.

What should we conclude based on the evidence?

[Mountain Man]

... to sneak out the front door in order to avoid her attackers.

She didn't say "sneak out", Jimmy, she says she RAN down the stairs and through the living room where they were all gathered. In one telling of her story, it's implied that the orther two attendees met Kavanaugh and Judge at the bottom of the stairs. Either way, it's impossible that she could have run out the front door without being seen.

But I do find it curious that you're changing the details of Ford's claims in an attempt to make sense of her sketchy accusations.

[oxmixmudd]

• Edited by a Moderator •You're seeing what you want to see.

As for Ford's witnesses, I have yet to see a good explanation for why none of them would remember the remarkable incident of her running down the stairs, past them in the living room, and out the front door, never to return. They all say it never happened. They don't remember attending the party as described by Ford. Ford can't even say who's house it was!

Based on reason and logic, there are only two conclusions consistent with the evidence.

To call someone a liar on this board requires a justification. The statement you are saying is a lie is my opinion that the way you've worded the statements I quoted is how person with partisan hatred would word them. Expressing an opinion is not telling a lie. My point, in case you missed it, is not to persist in claiming hatred, but to point out there is little if any difference between how you said those things and how someone that did hate all things democrat would word them.

I suggest you back off that sort of extreme, dare I say hateful, accusation before you cross a forum behavioral boudary.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Ford's husband claims after the fact that she told their therapist. The therapist's notes have no record of this in addition to the curious discrepancy that Ford claimed four attackers and not just two.

What should we conclude based on the evidence?

Ford's husband say she identified Kavanaugh at the time. The notes reflect human error, they describe the assault, but there is nothing incredulous about the therapist taking notes during the session and later during the process of transcribing those notes into the record confusing the fact there were 4 boys in the house with the number participating in the assault.

That discrepancy has little to no impact on the implications of the fact she sought help from a counselor over the event 5 years before the present revelation of it. The implication being that such an event occurred. She isn't making it up. If the husband volunteered confirmation that she identified Kavanaugh at the time when she couldn't remember if she did depends on his credulity, not hers. But the fact she admits she is unsure if she mentioned the name at the time goes directly to support her own credulity.

Jim

[JimL]

So when the FBI come back Wednesday or Thursday with basically the same info that we have now are the liberals here going to satisfied?

No, of course not, this is a compromise, the best the Dems could expect to get out of the majority run kangaroo court. There should have been, and still should be a full FBI investigation. Not that it matters from the Dems perspective, Kavanaugh has shown himself to be not fit for the position already, but then again most republicans in congress aren't fit to serve either so what do you expect. Hopefully democrats and independents will wake up and vote these hucksters out of the majority in the midterms before they destroy democracy altogether.

[lilpixieofterror]

No, of course not, this is a compromise, the best the Dems could expect to get out of the majority run kangaroo court. There should have been, and still should be a full FBI investigation. Not that it matters from the Dems perspective, Kavanaugh has shown himself to be not fit for the position already, but then again most republicans in congress aren't fit to serve either so what do you expect. Hopefully democrats and independents will wake up and vote these hucksters out of the majority in the midterms before they destroy democracy altogether.