According to her statement, no stockings. Lack of underwear is not an invitation to have anything jammed up there by anybody who wants to. I would like to see her interviewed on FOX by a real professional.
Where did I say it is an invitation?
Murder, prevent, or confirm?
Where did I say that you said that? Just trying to understand the relevance of what she was wearing was.
Nope. Not even close.
You inferred it right here:
And if you want to understand the relevance of what she was (not) wearing, ask a woman.
Doesn’t seem like a hill to die on – on either side of the disagreement.
Its not. He’s just being contrary for the sake of being contrary.
Another reason not to believe the accusation:
It was made to the media, not to authorities.
1 Like
It sure as ■■■■ ain’t “before”.
Was Kavanaugh accused of several acts of sexual impropriety during his late teens early twenties before the vote on his confirmation … yes or no?
There is zero chance that I will do that. 
So I guess I’ll be movin on now.
1 Like
Again, innocent until proven guilty. Did you feel sorry for Kavenaugh?
Which is why I’d like to see her interviewed. Hopefully on a real news network. FOX will do just fine.
Was Kavanaugh’s confirmation a dead-bang certainty in this Senate before the hearings ever began? Yes or no?
No, HE implied it. YOU inferred it.
Sorry, but that’s one of the few I’ll call out.
Yes. There was zero doubt before the “eleventh hour smear” that he was going to be confirmed. The smear was launched solely to try to upset that certainty.
2 Likes
Infer this 
Yes, I take your meaning. See how that works?
Well, you clearly missed the point. Probably a faulty inference on your part.
