Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
I understood she was asked two questions on her lie detector test. The test was also arranged by her pro-bono democratic lawyer - the same ones that did not inform her she could have testified on the record in California confidentially and privately.
I do understand that the calendar doesn't not reflect every moment of his life - I just find it to be very convincing along with his testimony. As he describes it he recalls very minor details about his past. It states he was out of town and he recalls details of those trips out of town.
Her case was presented as "I think it happened on this date but i'm not sure." Now her lawyers have his timeline... Why not try and say it happened in June or July when his calendar looked more "open" to this occurring? Who can prove it wrong?
So again, you're pointing to a seriously retarded conspiracy on her part and other women as well.
I'll state again, I hope he doesn't get confirmed. I'll outwardly admit I don't want him there because of his politics. I don't give a shit about abortions and Kavanaugh is the only judge that Trump could find who stated that a sitting president couldn't be indicted. That was the reason for his nomination. So let the politics play out.
As for the women and the accusations themselves... why disbelieve them? The timing sucks for conservatives, and it DOES call into question a completely different reckoning of all our (men's) past and what consent may be for lots of guys. But that might be a good thing. If that'd been a friend of mine and those guys pulled that shit, I'd have beaten them severely.
Also: Kavanaugh is a fucking liar. Every reference in his yearbook is about drinking. Stop acting like a choirboy and admit you're a boozehound. It's fine! That's what kills me so often about conservative politicians: the phoniness.
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-...rds-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
Quote: @Bezerker88 said:
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-...rds-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
That's why Mark Judge is in hiding and until recently refused to testify under oath that it didn't happen.
Also: she detailed this to her therapist like 7 years ago. Naming the assailant as a man who could somebody end up on the SC.
All I'm trying to get some of you guys to do is admit you just want him nominated because of his beliefs. I've admitted why I DON'T want him nominated, but that doesn't change the allegations.
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
That's why Mark Judge is in hiding and until recently refused to testify under oath that it didn't happen.
Also: she detailed this to her therapist like 7 years ago. Naming the assailant as a man who could somebody end up on the SC.
All I'm trying to get some of you guys to do is admit you just want him nominated because of his beliefs. I've admitted why I DON'T want him nominated, but that doesn't change the allegations.
Do you read what is posted? The link states that the therapist notes do NOT name Kavanaugh.
Maybe I missed where that has changed... I'll check...
Edit - nope I cannot find where it says Kavanaugh is named in the therapist notes... just that they say four boys in the room instead of two that she is now claiming.
Quote: @Bezerker88 said:
@ KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
That's why Mark Judge is in hiding and until recently refused to testify under oath that it didn't happen.
Also: she detailed this to her therapist like 7 years ago. Naming the assailant as a man who could somebody end up on the SC.
All I'm trying to get some of you guys to do is admit you just want him nominated because of his beliefs. I've admitted why I DON'T want him nominated, but that doesn't change the allegations.
Do you read what is posted? The link states that the therapist notes do NOT name Kavanaugh.
Maybe I missed where that has changed... I'll check...
Edit - nope I cannot find where it says Kavanaugh is named in the therapist notes... just that they say four boys in the room instead of two that she is now claiming.
Haha you goofball. Read what I wrote in direct response to that. Her notes don't name a name, but she says it's a man who was potentially going to be a SC nominee in the future.
But again, the conspiracy started in 2011 (or 2012... I'm lazy right now).
He testified to drinking, right? He said he loves beer. He explained the devils triangle as a quarters drinking game. He was pressed to explain how to play it. He was very candid about enjoying beer and partying with his friends. I never saw him trying to act like a choir boy or some kind of angel.
That makes him a liar? Perhaps you are lying about having proof of conversation in your situation because you too liked to drink? See how easy that was (no, I don't believe you are lying it was just a point). That is some scary shit. That's an incredible premise to prove sexual assault allegations. Where did he lie about it? No where has he pretended or stated he doesn't engage in drinking alcohol. He asked Amy Klobuchar if she liked drinking beer too, lol... the media spins it as "Kavanaugh went after Klobuchar."
I can't attest to the other women because they have not exactly come forward in the proper place or setting. The New York Post isn't it; and if it is, you can't scoff at the fact the New York Times refused to publish it over credibility issues. But sure, absolutely, I would love to hear their stories under oath.
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
@ KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
That's why Mark Judge is in hiding and until recently refused to testify under oath that it didn't happen.
Also: she detailed this to her therapist like 7 years ago. Naming the assailant as a man who could somebody end up on the SC.
All I'm trying to get some of you guys to do is admit you just want him nominated because of his beliefs. I've admitted why I DON'T want him nominated, but that doesn't change the allegations.
Do you read what is posted? The link states that the therapist notes do NOT name Kavanaugh.
Maybe I missed where that has changed... I'll check...
Edit - nope I cannot find where it says Kavanaugh is named in the therapist notes... just that they say four boys in the room instead of two that she is now claiming.
Haha you goofball. Read what I wrote in direct response to that. Her notes don't name a name, but she says it's a man who was potentially going to be a SC nominee in the future.
But again, the conspiracy started in 2011 (or 2012... I'm lazy right now).
I'm not seeing that... From Vox a left leaning reporting source
In these notes Kavanaugh is not named, but Ford describes an attack by
students from an elite boy’s school. These students are now “highly
respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington,” she said.
https://www.votwitter.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/27/17880490/supreme-court-nominee-christine-blasey-ford-kavanaugh
Highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington from an elite boy's school. That would cover more than just a potential SC nominee... wouldn't it? Probably covers a lot of boys. Like I said... no mention of Kavanaugh.
edit - I cannot find where she said its a potential SC nominee.... can you?
There is already discussion about impeaching him. Apparently the FBI investigation isn't going to be good enough because the Democrats were confused at the end of the vote - they all left their seats and refused to participate when it came time to vote. A recess was called. Dem leadership had a discussion with Sen. Flake about an FBI investigation during the recess and it was "agreed to" that he would ask to motion for a one week FBI investigation. As soon as he begin stating he wanted a 1 week investigation, all of the Dems. came back into the room to take their seat. As soon as they started coming back to their seats, Flake reiterated he would vote to confirm Kavanaugh but wanted a limited scope investigation into the new allegations before moving forward as a committee on the Floor. Dems came back in seemingly expecting a motion on the FBI investigation - Grassley then took role on the nomination. 11-10 move it on to the Senate. The Dems. sat there confused thinking they came back into the room because there was an agreement to vote on an FBI investigation directed by the committee. Flake reiterated that he was clear and that they were confused, that his vote moves it to McConnell and 'out of this committees' hands to be approved for a Senate vote and that he will simply not proceed on the Floor until an investigation was completed. He said he would call the President himself as he has authority to do. Grassley concluded on the "two hour rule" to adjourn immediately after the vote and the Dems were a bit stunned by it.
Immediately after the hearing, CNN was stoked about an FBI investigation. It appeared Dems. got what they wanted. Today, now that it's clear Flake personally contacted the president to activate the FBI there is "concern" Democratic senators won't be able to pull stings in the investigation. Naturally we have to impeach him. They misunderstood the specifics of what Flake was saying in the hype of opening an investigation, they came back into the room, they called role on the nomination and voted. The Dems. got exactly what they asked for in an FBI investigation and yet it's becoming clear they weren't exactly interested in that at face value.
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
He testified to drinking, right? He said he loves beer. He explained the devils triangle as a quarters drinking game. He was pressed to explain how to play it. He was very candid about enjoying beer and partying with his friends. I never saw him trying to act like a choir boy or some kind of angel.
That makes him a liar? Perhaps you are lying about having proof of conversation in your situation because you too liked to drink? See how easy that was (no, I don't believe you are lying it was just a point). That is some scary shit. That's an incredible premise to prove sexual assault allegations. Where did he lie about it? No where has he pretended or stated he doesn't engage in drinking alcohol. He asked Amy Klobuchar if she liked drinking beer too, lol... the media spins it as "Kavanaugh went after Klobuchar."
I can't attest to the other women because they have not exactly come forward in the proper place or setting. The New York Post isn't it; and if it is, you can't scoff at the fact the New York Times refused to publish it over credibility issues. But sure, absolutely, I would love to hear their stories under oath.
His roommate and numerous people have described him as a sloppy drunk. Which is fine. The way he stated it sounded silly to me.
Dude, I'm not out to ruin the guy. I tried to make that evident in my original post. This IS a he said/she said. And it sucks.
Also: try me. I went back 12 years and have a screenshot of that girl's apology to me. I won't post it publicly but I'd gladly PM that.
Quote: @Bezerker88 said:
@ KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
@ KingBash said:
@ Bezerker88 said:
Nope what I'm saying is something happened to her and she believes it was him. She just needs evidence to back it up. Her witnesses do not corroborate her story. Her best friend(key witness) says that she does not remember attending a party that Kavanaugh was at.
There was nothing credible about her testimony that I saw as far as details. Memories are tricky... From a 2013 article(so there no changing to fit the needs of the current issue)
Now, leaders in memory research don’t think that’s the way the mind
works at all. Instead, they’ve come to believe that memories actually
are fluid things, subject to alteration every time they’re retrieved.
When a long-term memory is recalled, it becomes temporarily fungible and
goes through a rebuilding process known as reconsolidation. Which
suggests that memories, even terrible ones, can be changed during that
period when they’re once again unstable.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/what-scientists-now-know-about-repairing-memories-1566240/
So once again, she could be remembering it wrong but yet at the same time believe she's telling the truth. I believe something bad happened to her. I'm just not convinced(since she cannot remember the exact date and other details about that night) that she is remembering it correctly. Then there's this list... I'll post one of them.
8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington
Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was
mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s
list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.
https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/
short versions of two others - Her immediate family do not back her story. Father, mother, brothers are no shows in signing backing letters. Her 2012 therapist notes which she contends back her story.. do not mention Kavanaugh... the notes say 4 boys were in the bedroom, she now says two... notes also say she was in her late teens.... now it's 15.
Not sure how anyone can say she's credible.
That's why Mark Judge is in hiding and until recently refused to testify under oath that it didn't happen.
Also: she detailed this to her therapist like 7 years ago. Naming the assailant as a man who could somebody end up on the SC.
All I'm trying to get some of you guys to do is admit you just want him nominated because of his beliefs. I've admitted why I DON'T want him nominated, but that doesn't change the allegations.
Do you read what is posted? The link states that the therapist notes do NOT name Kavanaugh.
Maybe I missed where that has changed... I'll check...
Edit - nope I cannot find where it says Kavanaugh is named in the therapist notes... just that they say four boys in the room instead of two that she is now claiming.
Haha you goofball. Read what I wrote in direct response to that. Her notes don't name a name, but she says it's a man who was potentially going to be a SC nominee in the future.
But again, the conspiracy started in 2011 (or 2012... I'm lazy right now).
I'm not seeing that... From Vox a left leaning reporting source
In these notes Kavanaugh is not named, but Ford describes an attack by
students from an elite boy’s school. These students are now “highly
respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington,” she said.
https://www.votwitter.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/27/17880490/supreme-court-nominee-christine-blasey-ford-kavanaugh
Highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington from an elite boy's school. That would cover more than just a potential SC nominee... wouldn't it? Probably covers a lot of boys. Like I said... no mention of Kavanaugh.
edit - I cannot find where she said its a potential SC nominee.... can you?
"Left leaning"
Why would I bother to respond? There are facts and there are lies. This structure that Fox News has created that certain reports are false because you don't like them is idiotic.
And at the end of the day, let's say this was a massive conspiracy to steal a SC seat... good. Steal the seat. Republicans stole one from Obama. Nobody talks about that enough. It was LITERALLY STOLEN by these hypocritical children. So if everything comes out and we find out Dr. Ford is some Manchurian Candidate style operative... okay!
|
