My faith in humanity has been restored thanks to Jeff Flake and Lisa Murkowski.
Kavaunaugh is in deep doo doo. Putting the sexual assaults aside, he lied about so many trivial things in his confirmation hearing that when the FBI starts talking to his former classmates his ridiculous claims made under oath about his yearbook entries, his lack of sexual activity and his drinking habits will be debunked.
Jeff Flake and Lisa Murkowski - HaHaHaHaHaHa
Yep, sometimes heroes come from the most unlikely places.
Heroes??? Are you serious?
Originally posted by: David Miller
Heroes??? Are you serious?
Jeff Flake and Lisa Murkowski are my heroes for the day.
I don't comment much but I have to ask Mark :
What will your objections be if Kavanaugh is found innocent of any wrong doing with Ford by the FBI? What if they can't find any corroboration for her story? Will you agree with his appointment then? You have posted you think that Julie Swetnick was gang raped by him do you want that disproved also?
I enjoy reading this forum but you and others have gotten quite nasty with comments lately. What happenned to common decency and civility in discussions?
Rumor has it (for what rumors are worth) this is just a formality. The Republican Senators are having a discussion about which "YES" vote will cause the least damage in their state. Ultimately that Senator will vote yes and evangelical,Mike Pence, will break the tie. My guess it will be Lisa Murk.
They could not in good conscience ignore the allegations without a legitmate investigation. That invesitgation will reveal that Brett K lied under oath about his drinking habits but the accussation of assault will remain a he said she said event....even though she said it 6 years ago.
I suspect we'll have another sex offender on the bench....and we'll have another Democratic surge in the elections just like the last time Republicans put a scumbag deviant on the bench
And yes Feinstein held this for 2 months, it was then “leaked”! My what amazing timing!
siwst852 said, What will your objections be if Kavanaugh is found innocent of any wrongdoing with Ford by the FBI? What if they can't find any corroboration for her story? Will you agree with his appointment then? You have posted you think that Julie Swetnick was gang-raped by him do you want that disproved also?
What I have learned in this debate is that most people don't have a good understanding of what corroboration is. In a lot of sexual assault cases, there are no witnesses other than the victim and the perpetrator[s]. For example, with both Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein there were no witnesses other than those two perpetrators and their victims. A big part of the corroboration with Cosby and when Weinstein goes on trial is/will be a pattern of behavior. That is they both have multiple victims that are able to testify that he did the same thing to them.
With Kavanaugh, you have the same thing there are 3-4 known potential victims. Dr. Ford, Julie Swetnick, Deborah Ramirez and a 4th unnamed victim out of Colorado that was reported by a Republican to her Republican Senator and the Republicans sat on it. Even though none of the women knew each other and their paths never crossed, they all tell a similar story that a drunken Kavanaugh sexually assaulted them. That is strong corroboration.
Dr. Ford came across as very credible so much so that even Trump, Republican Senators, and various Fox News commentators said she did. I am told Deborah Ramirez is just as credible and has a reputation for being very honest. I don't have enough information on Julie Swetnick to gauge how credible she will come across other than her claims were corroborated by, Elizabeth Rasor, the one time girlfriend of Mark Judge who said that he confessed to her back when they were in high school that he and some of his yet unnamed classmates ran a train on a drunken girl at a party. She made this statement before Julie Swetnick came forward. Rasor has also said she is willing to testify under oath and/or cooperate with the FBI. Mark Judge is now cooperating with the FBI.
You have the matter of Kavanaugh's own calendar which has a July 1, 1982, entry of him, going to "Timmy’s for skis w/Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie, Squi.” That puts him, Judge, PJ and the guy Ford said introduced her to Judge all together at a party drinking alcohol in the same time frame Ford went to a party where she said Judge and Kavanaugh were drunk and sexually assaulted her. Since this is Kavanaugh's own evidence, it is really hard to refute. Timmy's house was apparently just a few blocks away from Ford's.
Julie Swetnick also claims to have corroborating witnesses of her own. Deborah Ramirez has numerous corroborating witnesses not necessarily that witnessed the act but rather that observed Kavanaugh blackout drunk and belligerent on numerous occasions during his college years which is contrary to his sworn statements. These people include his Freshman roommate, his friends and numerous people that have come forward and said Kavanaugh was lying as he was a heavy drinker even in the context of the times.
You have Mark Judge's autobiography where he describes his high school years as having been spent as a blackout drunk and his school "swimming in alcohol." He describes incidents of Kavanaugh being so drunk that he passed out. Which again is contrary to Kavanaugh's sworn testimony.
To summarize, it isn't simply a he said she said. It is a he said she, she, she, and she said. All the women have various forms corroboration. The guy that knows the most about Kavanaugh during his high school days and college days, Mark Judge, is a self-professed addict that admitted to his girlfriend that he participated in a train ran on an intoxicated girl.
Plus, you have the numerous obvious small lies Kavanaugh told in his testimony. When the issue is the kind of things you do when you are drunk stating you never drink to excess under oath is laughable. Making the ridiculous claim that when he said in his yearbook he was a Renate Alumnus it just meant that she was a great friend to all the boys and not the town bicycle. The laughable explanation that the Devil's Triangle was drinking game rather than a 2 guys on one girl threesome. House Republicans got caught editing the Wikipedia page that defined the term during the hearing shortly after he gave his bizarre definition of the term. When the FBI talks to his high school friends you can be sure they will all get the question of what did they understand the terms Devil's Triangle, ralphing, boofing and Renate Alumni to mean. The point being all of these little lies matter. They were under oath and thus perjury. If you can't tell the truth about the little stuff, how can you be trusted to tell the truth about the big stuff?
How is that for corroboration?
I enjoy reading this forum but you and others have gotten quite nasty with comments lately. What happened to common decency and civility in discussions?
Nasty comments about public figures are fine if I understand the rules here. Nasty comments about other members are not. I try and refrain from doing that. I even apologized to Bob a few days ago for mistakenly attributing someone else's comment to him.
I will tell you what I tell everyone else. Participate in the forum and help shape it and move it in a direction you like. I am all for more participation. I have said this numerous times, but I will repeat it again. I have tried posting non-political topics on a variety of subjects now but those threads quickly die often without any reply at all, so I post things I know people will respond to.
Mark- If you posted something others wanted to read you might get more responses. You know that political postings will get responses - especially when you are completly wrong. Your loop hole finding mentality is the classic example of not seeing the forest for the trees. If you do the crime, then do the time. If you did not do the crime, then repeated lies will not change the facts. You are the classic example of one who prefers to "stir the pot" with rumors, outright lies, and twisted logic. Given time, the truth will show itself. You never offer rational answers, you just move on to another topic when you are found to be wrong. You should be working , if one could call being a consumate liar as working, for CNN, the Washington Post, or the National Inquirer. I, for one, find your postings insulting and totally un American. You and your ilk ARE the reason this site has lost people who used to post.
