But he will have zero effect on my life from Hollywood. He mad a stupid comment… I could just boycott his movies…
Supreme Court justices however…
And yet here you are.
Nope I can’t say that.
But if someone were to place me at a party, I would be able to tell you if I was or wasn’t at that party. Unless of course it was as non specific as this case. Oh you can’t tell me even the month? You can’t tell me the house? Just a pary sometime in the late summer or fall, and you ~think~ it was x year?
1 Like
debra katz is a woman. Allegedly.
You don’t even know the parties involved.
I had the lawyer misidentified. You are right… but I focused on the contents of what she said – and the fact remains that you were twisting the truth to support your agenda.
It’s not my thread. I have no agenda.
I’m only pointing out how blasey ford was always lying. Her lawyer is simply trying to justify the lie. And keep people interested in case of another looming battle.
Your assessment of her lawyers’ statement is an obvious distortion of what was quoted. Your assessment of Dr. Blasey-Ford is the standard right-wing dismissal of any woman who claims a Republican abused her and since it is an automatic and standard response has no credibility.
No no it’s not. She is saying her client came forward in part to smear the nominee and leave an astrick by his name. Plain and simple.
No it’s a respons to someone who has so many holes in the story you could drop boulders through it.
It’s like Mr. News Nugged (lemme think of his name). I started out believeing him. Then when he admitted he had been paying the woman off for years and not even telling his wife . . . I branded him guilty. (Herman Cain . . . found his name. To me he will always be Mr. News Nugget from the one and only day I listened to his Radio show.)
I respect her for coming forward, but its done the issue should be dropped now.
1 Like
[quote=“Snow96, post:53, topic:211668, full:true”]
No no it’s not. She is saying her client came forward in part to smear the nominee and leave an astrick by his name. Plain and simple.
Your response is diistortion plain and simple. The quote was this was part of the reason Dr. Blasey-Ford came forward. They understood how difficult it would be to make the case against the blizzard of character assassination that would be put up but they wanted the story out even if it would be rejected. You are pretending it was the sole motivation – a blatant distortion.
1 Like
That’s your argument here?
It’s a nit with respect to the overall point.
And that “part” was the only part addressed in the lawyer’s statement. It’s the “part” the lawyer considered worth mentioning.
And it’s a sinister part.
1 Like
The OP took a statement that said “this is part of the motivation” and changed it to “this is the entire motivation.” Pointing out that distortion is not nitpicking, it is setting the record straight.
I distorted nothing. She’s a scumbag liar and has earned an asterisk in the dictionary next to the definition of liar.
How else do you explain a woman who testified under oath that she had no other connection to Kavanaugh and his friends, except through her boyfriend, testifies that her boyfriend was not present at the gathering, and her boyfriend is the only person who lived within walking distance of the place she testified to being at directly prior to the gathering?
Not to mention her friend who says she has never met any of the people named.
AND kavanaugh can place his whereabouts throughout most of the summer.
AND her story kept changing.
She’s scum. Just like her lowlife lawyer.
Respect to the lib posters who were smart enough to avoid this topic.
1 Like
The distortion here is your insertion of the word “entire”. Your reply to me is the first time the word was used in this thread.
Not only are you picking a nit, but you are building it on your own fabrication. This isn’t the first time I’ve called you out for fabricating stuff.
Or maybe I just set the record straight.
1 Like
Figure out the quote function, I can’t tell who to yell at.
I can’t believe you’re still defending the Kavanaugh witch trial. I’m more disappointed than angry.
Keep it up. Women voters are deserting the party that calls rape victims “scumbags” and the results at the polls are clear.
With maturity comes the understanding that victory is best observed by magnanimity towards all parties, not by name calling. Your need to endlessly trash people you have beaten shows how little confidence you have in the basis of your victory.
Setting the record straight would be to acknowledge the word “only” rather than quibbling with my obvious interpretation of what you were doing.
Mueller was a witch hunt. Kavanaugh was a witch hunt. Your lack of variety in metaphors disappoints me.
So now she was raped?? Even the lying scumbag blasey ford never claimed that.
Talk about distorting the facts.
Polls show people don’t like liars.
2 Likes
Stop hunting witches and I’ll stop saying it. You © just want to burn people at the stake for not being like you ©.
Woke Supremacism. Petty tyrants.
What the libs did to Kavanaugh was a national disgrace.
3 Likes
