The dems wanted an investigation and they will get it tomorrow.
Ford gets her time to talk about one incident.
Kav will have to talk and respond to 3-4 incidents.
Dem will get to investigate and ask Kav all the questions they want tomorrow. it is going to be nasty.
I’m a repub but I just don’t think he survives tomorrow.
So are you now accusing the mods of deleting you post for nothing? Because it’s not my posts being deleted. Unless it’s response you yours.
I didn’t say every single rape attack. I said after 10 gangs rapes with line of boys going down the hall and not one single police report?
1980’s must have been dark ages. For some reason that decade no one reported rapes.
Why is that?
Well, of course it doesn’t matter whether you would consider their stories to be evidence, does it?
They are evidence.
Almost every woman I’m close enough with to know has been sexually assaulted at some point in their lives. An awful lot of them learned early on that it was easier to just shake it off and go on with their lives. They aren’t necessarily psychically altered and paralyzed by the incident in a casually visible way.
Let’s just hear this woman out tomorrow. I don’t see how anyone could put themselves on the line like this, with the consequences she is facing, just because she hates the president or something. It doesn’t make any sense.
That is a rational assessment in a sea of hysteria and assumption. Your prediction might just be right. I’m not sure, but I will watch the developments unfold.
Thank you for this post.
Im not going to keep responding to you avoiding questions posed to you despite me answering yours, that isn’t how this works. Anyone reading this chain can see that. You’ve dug yourself into a deep enough hole tonight. I don’t need you ending up on the other side of the world.
An unsubstantiated allegation is not evidence the allegation being made is true.
It remains evidence.
You don’t think Ford’s story is credible?
I’ve asked this question a couple of times, and got no takers:
What’s the hypothesis about these stories, from Ford, and now the others? Is it that these people were paid by secret Democratic Party operatives to tell blatant lies? To ask for FBI investigations (Ford, another), knowing that they themselves were making up lies to tell?
Are they lying? If so, why? Paid? Or, just personally don’t want to have the Supreme Court become solidly right-wing politically? Willing to put their reputations and futures on the line on the chance, slim, that MAYBE they could torpedo this confirmation?
None of those hypothesis make much sense, with all due respect to Lard Lad. So please, explain, what’s the theory?
Did you read to the bottom and see the things this wacko was posting?? He makes some of the board libs almost look sane.
I will be watching everything tomorrow with an open mind even as somebody who would like kav confirmed. I just don’t think tomorrow is going to be good for Kav,
We will see what happens and as I think every senator should do let’s watch tomorrow and make a decision based on happens. This is why I think a committeee hearing is better then the “FBI investigation” many want. All of us can watch tomorrow and see what happens and form a conclusion and I think that is a good thing,
I’m a liberal but am with you and writing my Senators to confirm Kavenaugh immediately.
Which returns us once again to::
I’m not the one that thinks 1980’s were the dark ages.
And I’m sure as hell not one that thinks girls would go to known rape parties and not say anything…anything at all. Seems to me libs must think girls are stupid and weak.
To me that’s not logical at all.
I’m not sure how one could even make the claim that “rape” was involved when the same “victim” returns again and again to participate.
On fox just now ed henry said grassley just released a timeline of the interviews the committee has conducted and says they have twice interviewed a man who says he may have been the one who had an encounter with ford in 1982.
I am totally convince that story is bogus as all get go.
It’s completely illogical knowing what I know.
Was it John Barron?
