There was no evidence against Cosby, Weinstein, Ailes, Wynn, or the rest, just a bunch of stories and allegations. A boof ain't about flatulence, and a name followed by alumnus ain't about friends and devils triangle is surely never been a quarters game. You just took his word for it instead of looking it up yourself when he said it like everybody else.

He LIED, and so did you because to believe the dufus and Kavanaugh one would have to hold his nose with both hands, especially if you deem the WH GOP controlled so called investigation as credible. Come clean or go home!

Back to the FUNNIES!

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/166/16667/1666792.gif
Sorry but you seem confused and stuck. Need help with that? Let go of your nose and breath. You are cutting off the oxygen to your brain and cannot see with your eyes closed so tightly. Try it and feel better.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...67/1666709.jpg

The worse part about being lied to is believing those lies.

Quote:

---

There was no evidence against Cosby, Weinstein, Ailes, Wynn

---

Good grief. You just proved that you have not bothered to look up any information on the subject. The level of detail in the woman's accusation against Cosby, for instance, is probably fifty times greater than what Dr. Ford provided. There is no question but that they had a sexual encounter. Cosby admits to that. The question was about consent. Not even close to Dr. Ford's situation. "No evidence"??? Wow. What a statement.

Quote:

---

A boof ain't about flatulence, and a name followed by alumnus ain't about friends and devils triangle is surely never been a quarters game. You just took his word for it instead of looking it up yourself when he said it like everybody else.

---

I have heard several people say they understood the terms to mean just what he said they meant. You are actually just taking your own word for it. If you take even two minutes and look on the web, you will find "boof" has a number of varied meanings. Of course, the only thing that matters is what did it mean 36 years ago in BK's circle of friends. Same thing is true of "devil's triangle". It has a variety of meanings, one of which is a drinking game.

As usual, you are allowing your political views, and your hatred of all things Trump, to affect your judgement.

How do you hold your nose and cover your eyes at the same time? Oh wait, it can be done!


https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.NNmvu...pr=1.5&pid=1.7

Sorry I doubted you....8)

One thing I have learned in discussing these things. When one side runs out of facts, they resort to personal attacks. Oh well. No evidence still equals no evidence. Keep waiting on you guys to come up with something more that flatulence and the testimony of a poor woman who basically can't remember an awful lot of important details. It is disappointing that so many people are content to destroy a man's reputation because they just sort of, kind of think that, you know, the dude's guilty. And once again it becomes apparent. A hatred of all things Trump will warp an otherwise sensible person's thinking.

Geez guy lighten up! Find some funny cartoons so we can LAUGH at each other! Actually not only do I not hate you, the dufus, or BK, but I can take him and Ford at their words, (along with Ford's husband, therapist, and a lie detector test), and deem the need for a comprehensive investigation be done. Where we differ of course is comprehensive investigations, based on the number and scope, and which no where is your report does there include the named people above, verily all you have are denials from the accused, and testimonials from classmates who have no knowledge of this incident, and your own denials of his words at his hearing concerning his lecherous and normal 17 year old antics.

In addition while his buddy denies the incident he writes books of their school day antics, so to say there is NO evidence is a bit premature, and incomplete, and by my count there are at least 3 accounts that she has named that are solid probable cause against his denial and his buddy. You do not have a report from the chosen prosecutor Rachel Mitchel as to the veracity of BK's own testimony. A bit one sided by any standard.

So as more is revealed, lets have a great time! No beer, drugs or bad language, just good clean adult fun. You could stand it, because you certainly don't sound like a guy who has gotten what he wants. You sound as though you lost your best friend and the world is against you.

Quote:

---

If you take even two minutes and look on the web, you will find "boof" has a number of varied meanings. Of course, the only thing that matters is what did it mean 36 years ago in BK's circle of friends. Same thing is true of "devil's triangle". It has a variety of meanings, one of which is a drinking game.

---

I know what the teen guys in my generation (and my sons as teens) meant by those words, and they weren't cutesy, innocent meanings.

If you need a chuckle, read all the entries here:

https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...ils%20Triangle

https://jonathanturley.org/2018/09/2...naughs-answer/

Quote:

---

I did not know what to make of these hearings. I found both witnesses to be highly compelling. I am glad that there is more time for investigation but I doubt that a week will offer much of an opportunity for meaningful inquiries. While it may not uncover anything new, it will offer cover to a handle full of uncommitted Senators who want to vote for Kavanaugh to avoid political backlash while maintaining that they did so only after demanding an investigation.

---

Quote:

---

In addition while his buddy denies the incident he writes books of their school day antics, so to say there is NO evidence is a bit premature, and incomplete, and by my count there are at least 3 accounts that she has named that are solid probable cause against his denial and his buddy. You do not have a report from the chosen prosecutor Rachel Mitchel as to the veracity of BK's own testimony. A bit one sided by any standard.

---

You know, if you are going to continue down this road of evidence, at some point you have to actually come up with some. We have heard NOTHING from her therapist and don't even have the complete notes. Her husband knows... what she told him thirty years later. Her former boyfriend (or whatever he was) contradicts her statements in a major way. Her three named witnesses do not support her story. Unless I want to believe a story that rivals many modern novels, I can't believe Swetnick's wild tale. I mean at some point you have to be able to actually point to something solid. The birthers had more evidence than this.

Yes, I do take this discussion seriously. I take our country seriously, as I know you do as well. I think this business of destroying a man's reputation for the sake of the feminist cause is sleazy and despicable. I despise this sort of thing. It honestly surprises me that anyone would side with such a course of action purely on the basis of politics.

Wondergirl, I get your point, but it doesn't matter what the word means now. It matters what it meant thirty six years ago. Honestly, I had never heard the word before, and I do not live a sheltered life. Try being a public school administrator for twenty five years and you'll see what I mean.

Quote:

---

Wondergirl, I get your point, but it doesn't matter what the word means now. It matters what it meant thirty six years ago. Honestly, I had never heard the word before, and I do not live a sheltered life. Try being a public school administrator for twenty five years and you'll see what I mean.

---

I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about what those words meant in the '60s, '70s, and '80s. I'm older than you and have been around the block a few times -- went to college, grad school, taught school, my older son is 48, am a psychotherapist, and a retired librarian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I think this business of destroying a man's reputation for the sake of the feminist cause is sleazy and despicable

---

Hello j:

I dunno.. I see some women who made a complaint.. You see a left wing plot..

excon

Quote:

---

I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about what those words meant in the '60s, '70s, and '80s. I'm older than you and have been around the block a few times -- went to college, grad school, taught school, my older son is 48, am a psychotherapist, and a retired librarian.

---

I graduated high school in 71, got a Master's degree, and spent two years in Dallas in Bible College. I have never heard that word, much less have some knowledge of what it means. I guess it might just be a northern thing. At any rate, just supposing you are right and BK had your understanding of the word, then you have him dead to rights for being... a high school student. Yes, you will say he lied under oath. Well, he did if his understanding was your understanding. That will likely never be settled, but is it worth all this mess?

Quote:

---

Yes, you will say he lied under oath. Well, he did if his understanding was your understanding. That will likely never be settled, but is it worth all this mess?

---

Yes, it is. He lied under oath. He doubled down to tell the committee what a wonderful student he had been.

What do his lying and whitewash efforts say about his now being a Supreme? Plus his dancing double-time when very unprofessionally answering questions, along with his two-year-old's version of a meltdown, don't give me any confidence in his future performance on the SC.

Quote:

---

Yes, it is. He lied under oath. He doubled down to tell the committee what a wonderful student he had been.

---

What did he lie about under oath?

Quote:

---

Plus his dancing double-time when very unprofessionally answering questions, along with his two-year-old's version of a meltdown, don't give me any confidence in his future performance on the SC.

---

All opinion. Still short on evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

What did he lie about under oath?

---

Hmmmm, where should I begin....

Quote:

---

All opinion. Still short on evidence.

---

Apparently, you didn't watch his performance.

Quote:

---

Hmmmm, where should I begin....

---

Hmm. Just another tactic of the left. Make an accusation, but then you can provide no evidence. And there is no question but that he was a good student. Now that I think of it, you'd make a good democrat senator.

Quote:

---

Apparently, you didn't watch his performance.

---

I did watch. I thought he was more restrained than I would have been, considering what the shameless democrats put him and his family through. He was VERY restrained, and even generous, in his remarks on Dr. Ford. The part that bothered me the most was the number of times that democratic senators would ask him a question and then interrupt his answer, not allowing him to finish. I guess that is not considered to be "unprofessional" by you. Just another example of "I hate Trump, so Kavanaugh must be guilty." Trump derangement syndrome.

You really need to get over this victim mentality you project on this long time political operative. Expecting no opposition, is so naïve and worse expecting civility in the age of the dufus is worse. You knew what you were getting when you elected him, and that's the price you pay. Now all this need for evidence is as crap as the dufus's crappy rigged investigation. It's obviously okay to lie, cheat, and steal as long as you puff up and blast the opposition into compliance with the most vile uncivil performance you can muster.

Nope the dufus has set the tone and the sycophants go along, but pretty INSANE to think EVERYBODY else will just go along with a whimper. Doesn't work that way, so as you guys wield the power at least stop crying how unfair we are. Bottom line, we don't need any evidence to oppose the dufus or whatever he does, because what good is evidence since you will deny it any way? You have had PLENTY already of the bad behavior of your brand of governance, but just hold your nose.

What, you're tired of holding your nose or something? Too bad because it gets worse. Yeah your frat boy looks like he really is suffering since he is a justice on the SCOTUS now, just like he and you wanted. So stop whining about the price of your victory and be happy you got it while it lasts.

Quote:

---

Now all this need for evidence is as crap as the dufus's crappy rigged investigation.

---

Well, you said it. A man who has no interest in justice has no need for evidence. Again, your hatred of Trump has warped your thinking. Trump derangement syndrome. Sad to see. Try and get some help with that.

Quote:

---

What, you're tired of holding your nose or something?

---

Actually, with unemployment at a fifty year low and conservative justices who actually believe in constitutional law being seated on SCOTUS, I am starting to breathe easier. I just remind myself everyday that the most immoral and incompetent person to run for the presidency in decades did NOT win. That's always makes me smile.

I will agree that Trump needs to tone down the rhetoric. He has a big mouth. But for you to suggest that he is the sole source of the vitriol being spread about is just nonsense.

Quote:

---

Hmm. Just another tactic of the left. Make an accusation, but then you can provide no evidence. And there is no question but that he was a good student. Now that I think of it, you'd make a good democrat senator.

---

I didn't have time to list all the lies. I will post the list today.

Btw, I'm a lifelong Republican who is disgusted by what my party has become.

Quote:

---

The part that bothered me the most was the number of times that democratic senators would ask him a question and then interrupt his answer, not allowing him to finish.

---

You must have dozed off when he made all his smart-aleck remarks, threw questions back into the questioners' faces, and generally lacked in judicial temperament and behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Well, you said it. A man who has no interest in justice has no need for evidence. Again, your hatred of Trump has warped your thinking. Trump derangement syndrome. Sad to see. Try and get some help with that.

---

What evidence do you have he didn't do as alleged, besides speculation testimonials, reviews, and of course his denials. Sure you can make this about my hate for the dufus which I don't have personally, but I do hate lying, cheating, and bullying. I cannot hold my nose to that.

Quote:

---

Actually, with unemployment at a fifty year low and conservative justices who actually believe in constitutional law being seated on SCOTUS, I am starting to breathe easier. I just remind myself everyday that the most immoral and incompetent person to run for the presidency in decades did NOT win. That's always makes me smile.

---

Great economy, but you would be a liar to deny the solid foundation for it wasn't laid out by Obama and delivered to the next prez in great shape and a bow on top. I give Slick Mitch much credit for ignoring Garland and saving that seat for the dufus, he gambled and won AND got tax cuts though not only failed to repeal and replace Obamacare, but no infrastructure bill either. Good thing some states are doing what they can on the next level of governance.

Quote:

---

I will agree that Trump needs to tone down the rhetoric. He has a big mouth. But for you to suggest that he is the sole source of the vitriol being spread about is just nonsense.

---

The buck starts at the top, though obviously you guys LOVE his vitriol and bombast, but only a loony thinks they can dish it out and not get it back. The latest example of this was his blasting Ford and the left wing at the Kavanaugh press conference Tuesday. Too much to ask to reconcile and take his victory lap? Just more lies and BS! Hope you get help for that.

The dufus is always in campaign mode selling his BS, to his base, so talk to him about vitriol why can't you. Face it, YOU will ALWAYS be holding your nose and covering your eyes as long as the dufus and his sycophants are governing. That's the price you pay bud, so take my advice and don't let go.