Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

65 Women from Kavanaugh's High School Days Come Together to Call Out Scummy Feinstein on Her Dirty ****


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

I hope so. It's a quick indicator of the character of the speaker.

You got it exactly wrong,but no surprise there.It's a term for characterizing the political/social/moral views of a particular group of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JR33928 said:

Yea,65 women sign a document attesting to Kavanaugh's good character and one,(count 1) woman makes a claim like this and what do the libtards do???...glom onto the one different claim which seems to be totally out of character with what the other 65 women attested to and try to say that the one totally different characterization is the real one....nevermind what the other 65 women said,their opinions aren't appreciated or wanted and do not count.Period!!.

The woman passed a lie detector test regarding her accusation against the judge. That doesn't give you any pause in your rush to condemn her?

Just out of curiosity, did you support Roy Moore?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TomJH said:

The woman passed a lie detector test regarding her accusation against the judge. That doesn't give you any pause in your rush to condemn her?

Just out of curiosity, did you support Roy Moore?

Passing a lie detector test doesn't mean a damn thing,they can be beaten,that's why the tests aren't admissible in court,and BTW i don't remember condemning her.I just question the validity of the accusation and if reports are correct,her sanity too.

BTW Doesn't the testimony of 65 women attesting to his good character mean anything to you...do their opinions carry no weight??...are their opinions not just as valid as the one lone woman??...do not their collective opinions tend to carry far more weight than the lone accuser??...i think they do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JR33928 said:

BTW Doesn't the testimony of 65 women attesting to his good character mean anything to you...do their opinions carry no weight??...are their opinions not just as valid as the one lone woman??...do not their collective opinions tend to carry far more weight than the lone accuser??.

simply F-no!

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JR33928 said:

Passing a lie detector test doesn't mean a damn thing,they can be beaten,that's why the tests aren't admissible in court,and BTW i don't remember condemning her.I just question the validity of the accusation and if reports are correct,her sanity too.

 

Even the greatest critics of polygraphs say they're about 70% accurate. Defenders say it's more like 90%.

That means the odds are she's telling the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JR33928 said:

Passing a lie detector test doesn't mean a damn thing

Failing one shouldn't mean a damn thing either.

They're no better at predicting truths and lies than flipping a coin. The chance of a lie detector analyst coming to the correct conclusion is 50%. Females in particular have such an abstract and malleable relationship with their memories that they can believe almost anything that's not true - making lie detector testing virtually useless.

Only people who make their money by operating them attest to their worth. Any decent attorney will advise against submitting to a "lie detector test". Even police commonly regard the tests as worthwhile only when the interviewee is "found" to be lying, while believing the findings can't be trusted at all if the interviewee is "found" to be not lying.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see, a lot of women come out of the woodwork just before the last election and accuse Trump of everything, and now one comes out at the last minute just before the Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Yep, it's all just a coincidence.

 

METOO at its finest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TomJH said:

Even the greatest critics of polygraphs say they're about 70% accurate. Defenders say it's more like 90%.

That means the odds are she's telling the truth.

Justin Trudeau in Canada got accused of groping, and I don't recall you believing that woman and demanding Justin Trudeau step down from office for his boorish behavior.

The Prime Minister on Thursday said that he did apologize at the time. "I do not feel that I acted inappropriately in any way. "

 

Yep, he got away with it because he is a liberal.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The woman came out and was named, passed a polygraph test, and produced notes from marital counseling in 2012 in which the exact same episode was recounted. The woman's husband said

In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

Source: Washington Post

Would I convict anybody based on such evidence, from 35 years before with no corroborating witness or physical evidence? Of course not.  Does all of  this cast enough doubt on Kavanaugh's character that more inquiry should be made before setting him up as a Supreme Court justice, to serve until the end of his natural life? Absolutely

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

They pulled this same stunt on Bush, and on McCain, then on Trump, and Clarence Thomas, and now Cavanaugh. It seems to be a pattern with Democrats. And this one has already changed her story from what her shrink made notes of, it was 4 guys back then, and now its only two.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JR33928 said:

Yea,65 women sign a document attesting to Kavanaugh's good character and one,(count 1) woman makes a claim like this and what do the libtards do???...glom onto the one different claim which seems to be totally out of character with what the other 65 women attested to and try to say that the one totally different characterization is the real one....nevermind what the other 65 women said,their opinions aren't appreciated or wanted and do not count.Period!!.

65 women who were not in the room when he tried to commit rape.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

65 women who were not in the room when he tried to commit rape.

Oh come on Bogie,this is only an accusation made by one miserable woman who's mental state may be in question,but you say it as though the accusation is a proven fact.It's not.You don't know what happened,if anything.I'd sure hate to be the guy who's jury you sat on...i'd be tried,convicted and hung out to dry before the trial ever began.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is - I bet Kavanaugh was probably well behaved as far as those 65 women knew.That's the thing about sexual assault. The perpetrator is not always, not even most of the time, some guy who spends his time in the bushes with a ski mask over his head, looking for the first woman he can grab. He can be somebody you see every day. Somebody who is charming and intelligent. Somebody you would let babysit your kids.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, calvinnme said:

The thing is - I bet Kavanaugh was probably well behaved as far as those 65 women knew.That's the thing about sexual assault. The perpetrator is not always, not even most of the time, some guy who spends his time in the bushes with a ski mask over his head, looking for the first woman he can grab. He can be somebody you see every day. Somebody who is charming and intelligent. Somebody you would let babysit your kids.

Good lord how you go to the inth degree to cast aspersions on a person's integrity you know nothing about.You're grabbing at straws.You've completely nullified the opinions of the 65 women who's testimony far outweighs the accusation of the one.You want to convict by innuendo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, calvinnme said:

Does all of  this cast enough doubt on Kavanaugh's character that more inquiry should be made before setting him up as a Supreme Court justice

Nope.

More inquiry into this "matter" would be completely irrelevant.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

More news: Sen. Bob Corker tells me that the Senate Judiciary panel shouldn't vote on Kavanaugh until Ford is heard out. "I think that would be best for all involved, including the nominee. If she does want to be heard, she should do so promptly."

 

Judiciary Committee member Flake tells POLITICO: "If they push forward without any attempt with hearing what she's had to say, I'm not comfortable voting yes ... we need to hear from her. And I don't think I'm alone in this"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is EVERYONE going to be chastised for every little stupid thing they've done in elementary /  HS / college / frat house?

Many do stuff  in their early years... it's called life / growing up.

frat-house.jpg

5ljCeVEb_400x400.jpg

 

What's next, Jimmy pulled Nancy pigtails 50 years ago?? SCREAM HARASSMENT!

Kid don't even THINK about going into politics, she WILL cry about it in 2048. :angry:

640-02778919en_Masterfile.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jakeem said:

 

5 minutes ago, Princess of Tap said:

I Don't think the Yale graduate, judge's son can use the high-tech lynching defense of Clarence Thomas in his particular case.

I guess the preppy boy is on his own..... LOL

# me too

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, hamradio said:

Is EVERYONE going to be chastised for every little stupid thing they've done in elementary /  HS / college / frat house?

Many do stuff  in their early years... it's called life / growing up.

frat-house.jpg

5ljCeVEb_400x400.jpg

 

What's next, Jimmy pulled Nancy pigtails 50 years ago?? SCREAM HARASSMENT!

Kid don't even THINK about going into politics, she WILL cry about it in 2048. :angry:

640-02778919en_Masterfile.jpg

Rape and attempted rape is not any little thing.

If you're not sure about this, you can ask Bill Cosby.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChristineHoard said:

If you are 17 years old you should know that's it wrong to physically restrain someone with the intention of sexual assault.  Not the same thing as pulling pigtails in grammar school.

 

IF it happened!

After 30+ years and everyone virtually falling down drunk at the time of ALLEGED event.

 

I can barely remember my HS days and was sober 24 /7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you just love the way that staunchly "moral" conservatives attack, deride and rationalize whenever one of their own faces an accusation?

Forget principles (particularly from the Bible thumpers) or labels like "conservative." Everything today in politics is pure tribalism.

To say that there should be further investigation of the accusation before a rush to confirmation in the Supreme Court is reasonable and not out of line.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...