FBI digs into U.S. Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh's past

[heybruce]

6 minutes ago, beechguy said:

No, but they are trying to control who does, I don't consider them credible.

You claim there are allegations of misconduct against some Senators who are going to vote on the Supreme Court nomination of a judge who has allegations of sexual misconduct and was nominated by a President with multiple allegations of sexual conduct, and you object to this.

 

Ok, you win.  Let's throw out all of them, especially the President, and start over.

[beechguy]

16 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You claim there are allegations of misconduct against some Senators who are going to vote on the Supreme Court nomination of a judge who has allegations of sexual misconduct and was nominated by a President with multiple allegations of sexual conduct, and you object to this.

 

Ok, you win.  Let's throw out all of them, especially the President, and start over.

I'm not necessarily opposed to that.

[smotherb]

6 hours ago, quandow said:

It goes beyond that, it's about character, honesty and integrity. If Kavanaugh had just 'fessed up and admitted he was a party monster as many of his classmates have reported, this wouldn't be such an issue. Bottom line, he lied to Senators. NOT what you want in a Supreme Court Justice.

Gee, you mean there are other implications to sexual assault?

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, beechguy said:

No, but they are trying to control who does, I don't consider them credible.

Do you consider Kavanaugh credible? It's clear that he's lied to the Senate committee.

[Sheryl]

Kennedy, Clinton  Bush and more would have failed these tests.

Kennedy, Clinton and Bush testified under oath that they did not ever drink excessively and black out while in High Scool or college?

I don't think so.

Bush was in fact quite up front about having had a drinking problem in the past.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[zaphod reborn]

8 hours ago, The manic said:

Kennedy, Clinton  Bush and more would have failed these tests.

 

They aren't Supreme Court Justices.  Completely different standard for politicians.  BTW, how did the FBI with 6 background checks miss that Kavanaugh was involved in a bar fight while at Yale which resulted in severe injuries and an assault arrest of Kavanaugh's drinking buddy?  Seems like some sort of cover-up.  Kavanaugh is a political operative so no surprise there.

[beechguy]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Do you consider Kavanaugh credible? It's clear that he's lied to the Senate committee.

More so than many of the Democrats on the committee, and at least a few of the Republicans, more importantly, I didn't find Ford all that credible either. That still doesn't mean I would be interested in hanging out with Kavanaugh or Trump. I just think some of these attacks are uncalled for, especially when it is just a reflection of the hate for Trump.

[mcambl61]

On 10/2/2018 at 9:06 AM, Lacessit said:

higher standard of probity.

Like the 6 fbi background checks? 

 

The whole thing is a sham for delay and destroy at all costs 

[mcambl61]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

Kennedy, Clinton and Bush testified under oath that they did not ever drink excessively and black out while in High Scool or college?

I don't think so.

Bush was in fact quite up front about having had a drinking problem in the past.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

There is zero corroborated evidence. Get over it. It is all an orchestrated phony circus

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

Like the 6 fbi background checks? 

 

The whole thing is a sham for delay and destroy at all costs 

 

3 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

There is zero corroborated evidence. Get over it. It is all an orchestrated phony circus

 

3 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

You have zero evidence of your claims 

Once again, Kavanaugh is not on trial, he is on a job interview.  Allegations of sexual assault, curious and unexplained financial dealings, involvement with stolen documents, and apparent lies about past conduct are valid reasons to suspect his character and fitness for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.  That is more than enough to reject him.

[utalkin2me]

Here is my theory, and for what it is worth I am just trying to explain all the evidence in the most simple way possible. 

 

Kav did it. He either realized at some point in time, or immediately after the incident that he had a serious problem. So, he took some preventative measures. 

 

Who is going to be the best at getting oit a step ahead of a crime?! I would think judges and cops. They know what they have to do, they know the minimum amount of people they need to contact so as not to have too many moving parts. 

 

What would it take in this case?...

 

1) A talk with Mark Judge. Not too hard to convince him, if judge fesses up they both go down.

 

2) A threat or some other move on the only two other people at the gathering. It is also so easy to keep your mouth shut in a case like this if you were there because your life can get turned upside down if you admit to being there. 

 

It may be far fetched, but it exaplains everything. For one, we know people that are super successful, eg a supreme court nominee, are very good a manipulating and persuading people to get what they want. We also know they tend to have power, money and connections. To me this explination makes the most sense, but it seems to be tough for any of us to view this situation in a vacuum, myself included I am sure. 

[riclag]

 Johnathan Turley ,law professor says somebody is  lying while answering questions about  the Polygraph testimony, ,it's either Ford or her ex. Fords activist pretending to be a lawyer council   obviously forgot to coach her about that line of questioning!

I hope she goes to jail, along with her far left resistance lawyers! 

 

 

[Slip]

36 minutes ago, riclag said:

 Johnathan Turley ,law professor says somebody is  lying while answering questions about  the Polygraph testimony, ,it's either Ford or her ex. Fords activist pretending to be a lawyer council   obviously forgot to coach her about that line of questioning!

I hope she goes to jail, along with her far left resistance lawyers! 

 

 

The GOP voice of reason...  Oh no, another one mocking a victim of sexual assault.  That whole "FFF" with the "devil's triangle", and "boofing" is as plain as the nose on your face.

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

 Johnathan Turley ,law professor says somebody is  lying while answering questions about  the Polygraph testimony, ,it's either Ford or her ex. Fords activist pretending to be a lawyer council   obviously forgot to coach her about that line of questioning!

I hope she goes to jail, along with her far left resistance lawyers!

Well, if you can't trust Zx0De7rZLk on twitter, who can you trust?

[SheungWan]

Kavanaugh unhinged? Whatever on earth gave us this impression during his testimony appearance? ????

[riclag]

29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Well, if you can't trust Zx0De7rZLk on twitter, who can you trust?

 She is a liar! Along with her "we will stop at nothing to destroy JK"far left council

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6235637/Ex-boyfriend-Christine-Ford-says-WASNT-afraid-flying-closed-spaces.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-sworn-statement-alleges-ford-lied-under-oath-about-prepping-someone-for-a-polygraph

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/christine-blasey-ford-polygraph-testimony-ex-boyfriend-contradicts/

"The friend wasn't identified in the ex-boyfriend's letter, but Dr. Ford's legal team said Ms. McLean was the woman".

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/kavanaugh/card/1538577632

 

 

[riclag]

18 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Kavanaugh unhinged? Whatever on earth gave us this impression during his testimony appearance? ????

What's wrong with being unhinged,Would you be if accused of sexual assault in front of millions of Americans ,while at the same time being attacked publicly as evil and not being allowed due process,with many dem's saying he's guilty before the hearing. It's just a thought

[SheungWan]

9 minutes ago, riclag said:

What's wrong with being unhinged,Would you be if accused of sexual assault in front of millions of Americans ,while at the same time being attacked publicly as evil and not being allowed due process,with many dem's saying he's guilty before the hearing. It's just a thought

 

"What's wrong with being unhinged,..."  Seemingly almost a de rigueur requirement for a sitting US Supreme Court member from the unhinged crowd.

[riclag]

The fact is the only thing consistent with Ford, is  her accusations are  inconsistent

[riclag]

3 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

 

"What's wrong with being unhinged,..."  Seemingly almost a de rigueur requirement for a sitting US Supreme Court member from the unhinged crowd.

Here is another fact "we will stop at nothing" the mantra for the far left and the dems,has back fired.I imagine JK felt it was a lynching ! One thing for sure it bumped Independent's and GOP to vote in the mid terms

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

[Rhys]

... all the time money and effort, to find his favorite bong...

[beechguy]

4 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Kavanaugh unhinged? Whatever on earth gave us this impression during his testimony appearance? ????

He wasn't unhinged, that's what it looks like when a guy has a set of balls, and pushes back against some A holes.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, beechguy said:

He wasn't unhinged, that's what it looks like when a guy has a set of balls, and pushes back against some A holes.

 

He was crying like a baby, though.

And regardless, this is about a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. If you thought that his conduct during the hearing was a positive indication as to that, I'd say the "unhinged" bit can be extended some.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, riclag said:

Here is another fact "we will stop at nothing" the mantra for the far left and the dems,has back fired.I imagine JK felt it was a lynching ! One thing for sure it bumped Independent's and GOP to vote in the mid terms

 

"One thing for sure..."

 

Do tell. And if it actually works in your side's favor, why do you want it to go away?

[mcambl61]

22 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

 

Once again, Kavanaugh is not on trial, he is on a job interview.  Allegations of sexual assault, curious and unexplained financial dealings, involvement with stolen documents, and apparent lies about past conduct are valid reasons to suspect his character and fitness for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.  That is more than enough to reject him.

again, zero actual evidence. Just unfounded far fetched innuendos from a compliant press.

 

It is abhorrent what the dems tried to do, and there will be a reckoning.

 

there is only one side behaving like spoiled screaming children harassing people.

 

A recurring theme for the leftist mob mentality.

[mcambl61]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

He was crying like a baby, though.

And regardless, this is about a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. If you thought that his conduct during the hearing was a positive indication as to that, I'd say the "unhinged" bit can be extended some.

I would like to see your demeanor in front of the entire nation defending yourself against some vile unfounded accusations that threaten to destroy your entire life and family.

 

it was a setup engineered in advance, unless you are blind to the timelines and actions

[mcambl61]

On 10/3/2018 at 9:33 AM, zaphod reborn said:

Kavanaugh is a political operative so no surprise there.

?

 

you mean like the federal judges appointed that want to legislate from the bench instead of interpreting it based on the constitution, law as it is written and precedents?

 

you mean like when Harry Reid changed the rules of the senate to 51 votes so they could pack the courts with federal courts with liberal judges, like that kind of political operatives?

 

be honest about what you are saying

[farcanell]

On 10/2/2018 at 7:27 PM, seajae said:

so far the only person that has any sort of back up is Kavanaugh, his accuser has been shot down by the 3 other witnesses  so her story could well be just that a story.  I know if I was falsely accused I would be doing exactly the same thing he is, the chances this is purely a democrat set up is extremely high as they have done it before. Everyone is following their political bias, dems are saying one thing and republicans another, going by all the real evidence so far he appears to be not guilty as he is backed up by the only witnesses she has mentioned, one of them supposedly a good friend, think there is a lot more to this than what is being said and hopefully iy will come out now the fbi are checking out the so called claims. 

 

Obviously you didn’t bother listening to Fords opening testimony, or her judiciary committee Q and A.... because this was openly discussed, to the point of acknowledging the uselessness of questioning the four people in question.

 

Brett the molestor..... no sir, never happened!

judge the drunk (and co accused).... no sir, never happened!

BOTH expected replies

 

PJ.... who was not in the room but downstairs enjoying some underaged drinking.... no knowledge

The woman.... same story... it wasn’t these two that were involved in anything other than yet another summer party, so there is NOTHING UNEXPECTED in them not being aware of the alleged crime.

 

Ford admitted these issues under oath... so only an oaf would dredge up this as relevant.... and only an oaf could assume an investigation reliant on these above persons, could be worthwhile

(Unless judges books can be seen as corroboration of Brett’s prior behavior and current deceptions)

 

Anyway.... more damning than witnesses that did not witness anything, (as discussed during the judicial hearing) is the police report that is uncontroversial proof of Brett’s deceitful answering (or deflection)

 

restricting the scope of the investigation is indicative of trump deliberately undermining and tampering in the investigation.

 

if this is MAGA in action, god help America.

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

I would like to see your demeanor in front of the entire nation defending yourself against some vile unfounded accusations that threaten to destroy your entire life and family.

 

it was a setup engineered in advance, unless you are blind to the timelines and actions

 

 My demeanor may well have been similar in an opening statement... it should scream outrage and injustice... a good judge would know that, and the impact on a jury, of a robust denial.

 

but I’m not looking for national respect and a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land

 

Anyway... started well, but then he became unhinged... he no longer acted reasonably, but became obstructive and abusive, sans any respect for the judicial committee or process.... this alone should disqualify him.... or give reason to requesting a further investigation

 

this behavior was far from supreme.... more like disqualifying, imo, as it is proof of contempt of Congress and contempt of the electors, by extension

 

and... now we know he’s proud of chugging beers thru his butt .... “have you boofed, yet?”.... lol

 

but timeline.... go back and look at all that, in its entirety, vs fixating on the specific date of the Disclosure of the information to the judicial committee, as a whole, because that’s over simplistic, and a “hook line and sinker” for trumps simplistic fan base.