Easy for you to assert that this involved the rape of children apparently.
But you avoided the question … why do you feel the need to diverge from the facts? It doesn’t help your argument.
Facts?
Kavs toast. Kennedy is wringing his hand
I am not suggesting that someone else’s would lie, it is that even if the events didn’t go as Ford says it did, by placing him at that party he is now the liar no matter what.
Applying that logic, you’re a Canadian…here in the United States…you’re opinion means nothing.
I hate to accuse the accuser…I know how often that has happened in our history.
But everything about this accusation reeks of a political ploy. I don’t like it.
Not a fan of Kavanaugh, but it’s unfair for him to be brought down this way.
Might be an “unpopular” stance, but it’s the one I have.
If Ford didn’t want it leaked, had changed her mind at the last minute to levy the accusations, why did she get a polygraph and a lawyer in August?
-Lindsey Graham
Ford has taken away the ability of a Kavanaugh alibi by not having a time and place. There were two others at the alleged party.
Try saying it in Trumpianies. Like “This is so unlike a court trial as the world has ever seen” Or “This is biggley not a court trial” or “Who knew not being a court trial was so hard”
you get the idea.
So allegations, true or not, are enough to deny confirmation? That’s silliness.
She could still have been sexually assaulted but by someone else that she now believes to have been Bret Kavenaugh. In other words it’s not truely a lie.
That is also a possibility.
There are a number of. There is, absent a confession from Kavenaugh, no way to settle the truth of the matter. It’s all about what people find believable. Oddly enough, what people find believable will split largely on party and ideological lines. Thing is, what’s “believable” does not necessarily mean true and we really ought to stop acting like we know what the truth is.
Ugh. First sentence should read: a number of plausible scenarios.
Absolutely.
She apparently didn’t mention his name for 30 years until 2012. I am wondering if this isn’t one of those now largely discredited “repressed memory” claims. She may fully believe details that didn’t happen. That is certainly something that should be looked into on Monday.
Or it may have happened.
Whether there were legitimate reasons she didn’t mention this 35 years ago, its not fair to bring it up now, especially haven forgotten the details that might have been verified…or not.
Shrug…this is part of the end result now…Reid removed the filibuster…mitch doesnt vote on Garland…this is the world you guys wanted…
Because the lawyer suggested it because of you guys…you gonna smear the ■■■■ out of her.
A poly may not be able to be used in court…but it has a social affect…
Do you know why Kavanaugh is refusing to be polygraphed?
He’s a liar?
There is much to be questioned regarding their scientific reliability.
Personally I would likely refuse to take on myself if I were ever in such a situation.
Did lindsey graham hint at what’s to come last night on Hannity?? Maybe she signed a yearbook??
