There was actually plenty of time three months ago. It was Diane Finestein that elected to wait until the hearings were practically completed before bringing all of this up. That's what makes it clearly a political stunt. I don't know what Kavanaugh did when he was 17, but I DO know what Bill Clinton did when he was in the White House. I don't recall hearing liberals weeping and wringing their hands about that, and pouring out their hearts about "the healings of trauma victims". No, then it was an avalanche of poison directed at Lewinsky who, thankfully for her, had held on to her evidence. Where was your weeping and heartfelt emotions then? So it's all about politics after all, and nothing about justice, either for Kavanaugh or Ford. It's just an opportunity for otherwise indifferent liberals to parade their phony concerns for women.

Republicans have no time to bring witnesses? What witnesses? There are none. They have bent over backwards to accommodate this accuser, but she has no witnesses. What would they present? A yearbook page, or a book, neither of which have any direct bearing on the accusation? It seems the dems have seized on this because they have nothing else to go with. They have behaved shamefully. Cory Booker sits there with a straight face asking questions when he is the one person in the room who is admittedly guilty of groping a girl in his teen years. All those democrats who say they are concerned about women's rights,why haven't they addressed that, or the Keith Ellison issue? What a noble bunch. It makes me glad beyond belief that I am not a liberal democrat. Repubs have their own sets of problems to be sure. As it says in Romans, "There are none righteous, no not one," and politics is frequently a dirty business. But when democrats attack a man who, from all accounts, has led an honorable life, then that is going too far. Is it possible he did something stupid in his teen years? Of course it is, and the lady might be telling the truth for all I know, so we'll just have to see what happens on Thursday. It is just unfortunate that this is being turned into a political circus. Barring the unexpected, if the republicans don't have the courage to approve Kavanaugh, then they will be as cowardly as the democrats.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...Th3hEAX2PQ--~C

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...VwfG89QBTA--~C

Typical democrat propaganda. On the first one, if Dr. Ford does not get enough time, it will be on her since she is the one who largely set the parameters for the interview. For the second one, the evidence for the accusation is so weak that I wouldn't think he would need an alibi.

imagine that ;he was a ring leader of a drug and gang rape cult in high school and no one knew about it for 30 years ! This nerd kept a personal calendar for over 30 years . His accusers can't remember when where and how . The most we have found out about him is that he was possibly an underage drinker . That would disqualify about 95% of my class.

On that basis you would ignore the allegations that are vehemently denied to push this fellow to the highest court of the land?

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...EJ7mX34zQg--~C
What's telling is not only the GOP's reluctance to slowdown and seriously investigate fully these claims, but the accusers willingness to testify under penalty of the consequences of law. So just a fair process it seems would put this to rest and clear your choir boy of all these allegations. That's clearly not what is being done here, neither by the boy scout or his pack leader the dufus. He said many times he wants a fair process, so let's take him at his word and look for the truth in a fair open way.

For that to happen there has to be a fair and unbiased seeker of truth to elevate this from the smears that both sides are engaged in. We can't have that until the GOP slows down from this effort to have a VOTE before the FACTS can be found.

I say this as the 3rd accuser comes forth, ready and willing to submit herself to FBI investigation under penalty of law.

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/a...e-girls-drinks

show me the evidence . Kavanaugh's nomination is a political process . The "fair process" is to have the opportunity to testify and be questioned by the members of the Judiciary Committee even though these are 11th and a half hour revelations withheld by Senators who's only interest is in delaying the process .

If they have charges against Kavanaugh they should make them formally to the law enforcement agencies .You know and I know that this is an act of desperation to stall the confirmation until after the midterms .It is one of the most transparent hail Mary passes I've ever seen. I have yet to see a smidgeon of credibility to any of it .


BTW ;when did you stop beating your wife ? heard rumors you did 30 years ago . I'm wrong ? Prove me wrong.

So according to Julie Swetnick’s accusation we’re supposed to believe that a gang of serial rapists were terrorizing young women at house parties and not only did no one ever report it but she KEPT GOING TO THE PARTIES? Oh and the FBI missed this on 6 background checks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

we’re supposed to believe that a gang of serial rapists were terrorizing young women at house parties and not only did no one ever report it but she KEPT GOING TO THE PARTIES?

---

I've heard similar stories from people who went to party schools. Fraternities are where the best-looking and ofttimes wealthiest guys live. Alcohol removes inhibitions. And young women don't consider the consequences, too often think, "[It] won't happen to me."

actually she was an adult going repeatedly to high school parties . and she kept on going according to her tale until she was raped .

Obviously the FBI never went back far enough, and OBVIOUSLY NEVER talked to his Yale roomie Mr. Roche. Even now reports are emerging that some of those females who endorsed him before are admitting they didn't know him but figured he was a good guy given his breeding and school affiliation.

Listening to you guys though always talking about his past vetting, seems a very simple and easy matter to have the FBI interveiw these accusers and put this crap to bed. So why not just do that to move on and call the left wing bluff? Why hasn't the Dufus moved to put this to bed with a SIMPLE and QUICK investigation and end the he said, she said?

Why is that so hard for you guys? The prez is having a news conference right now which would be better characterized as a filibuster session.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

actually she was an adult going repeatedly to high school parties . and she kept on going according to her tale until she was raped .

---

Let's talk about those parties and the time period (and what partygoers -- of what age -- usually did at them). Then let's talk about how much older the "adult" Julie Swetnick was and why she attended.

I did not attend parties in high school . But I attended many parties in the mid-70s in college. I do not recall ever seeing or hearing about gang rapes happening at those parties. She not only allegedly witnessed them (as an college adult going to high school parties) but she also claims to be a victim of them even after knowing the risk she was taking. Presumably there were many people attending and yet she can only identify 2 people .

She contends “numerous boys” were involved in multiple acts of sexual assault. Yet not one victim of gang rape from parties that she says

“occurred nearly every weekend during the school year.” ever reported the assault to the police.

Not a single victim or witness ever told parents, teachers friends who may happened to report them , or any other responsible adult.

There is no statute of limitations in Maryland for sex crimes ;so why has she not filed charges in 35 years . Which friend did she attend these parties with ? Are they willing to give an account ? What you mean she just showed up at these parties and left by herself ? What was she doing ;writing a college thesis about the social habits of wild high schoolers ?

Now Swetnick has had presumably multiple FBI backround checks from her positions at Treasury ,Mint ,IRS .She also claims to have had security clearance with State ,DHS ,Justice ,Customs and Border Protection . Yet none of either her or Kavanaugh's backround checks uncovered illegal drug spiked booze ,gang rape parties they attended in their school days .

Hmm why did she go to sleazy porn lawyer Avenatti ? Wasn't Gloria Allred available ? Wasn't Saul Goodman ? https://www.unilad.co.uk/wp-content/...aul-online.png

Btw, Julie Swetnick, the "adult" who attended ten (??) parties, is only about a year and a half older than Kavanaugh.

Quote:

---

not one victim of gang rape from parties that she says “occurred nearly every weekend during the school year.” ever reported the assault to the police. Not a single victim or witness ever told parents, teachers friends who may happened to report them , or any other responsible adult.

---

Very few women report such happenings, especially back then. The blowback against them would be as shaming as the incident -- and just as longlasting in its social and emotional effects.

nope Kavanaugh was born 1965 .She was born 1962 . That makes it more like 2-3 years older .She was an adult age college student attending underage high school parties.

So you think it is probable that they held parties every weekend where girls were gang raped and no one reported the incidents to any authority ? btw where did these parties occure ? These were high school kids . They did not own their own homes . Some parent or parents let them have boozy parties every weekend in their houses ? Her's is the weakest story of all the Kavanaugh "victims" . I don't think Ronan Farrow would even run with this story.

btw ;Swetnick was involved in a dispute with her former employer, New York Life Insurance Co., over a sexual harassment complaint she filed. Representing her in the complaint was the firm run by Debra Katz, the lawyer currently representing Ford. My what a small world !

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...=recirculation

Quote:

---

Mr. Judge

was, according to Christine Blasey Ford, the other boy in the room who tried to assault her at an underage drinking party.

Ms. Rasor

has no knowledge of that incident, according to the Post, but is willing to corroborate an account in the New Yorker that

Mr. Judge

conspired to get women sufficiently drunk enough to “consent” to group sex.

---

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...h-accuser-sho/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...anaugh-n913581

Oh Boy this is getting rather messy. Go ahead Tom find a way to dismiss the latest accusers. It's only Wednesday.

"I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process," "You've tried hard. You've given it your all... You may defeat me in the final vote but you'll never get me to quit. Never."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

"I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process," "You've tried hard. You've given it your all... You may defeat me in the final vote but you'll never get me to quit. Never."

---

Did you hear that dufus? Yo boy is fightin' just like you told him to. Nice evasion of the question about was he open to the FBI investigating the new allegations, Good job by McGann prepping him last week. I don't expect him to quit, but Dr. Ford was entirely credible. I have to tell you that Michael Judge would be the one to be called.

Repubs sure made a lot about dismissing an FBI report, but this circus started with Kavanaugh and his snarky interruptions of questions by senators. It was a sad sham show as predicted, except for the Ford testimony.

I believe her fully.

Quote:

---

BTW ;when did you stop beating your wife ? heard rumors you did 30 years ago . I'm wrong ? Prove me wrong.

---

Perfect illustration, especially when you add that the four people who supposedly told you the rumors all claim they don't even know you.

Why wouldn't the repubs say, "OK. We'll do the FBI thing. One week only and only on the two even semi-believable accusers (the third one about gang rape is nutty). Come back in a week, no real evidence, dems look stupid (as usual), vote Kavanaugh in. Game over.

Must add that Kavanaugh was masterful dodging questions by filibustering about himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Why wouldn't the repubs say, "OK. We'll do the FBI thing. One week only and only on the two even semi-believable accusers (the third one about gang rape is nutty). Come back in a week, no real evidence, dems look stupid (as usual), vote Kavanaugh in. Game over.

---

My understand is that senate repub staffers investigated the new allegations not the FBI.

Quote:

---

Must add that Kavanaugh was masterful dodging questions by filibustering about himself.

---

Dodging, sidetracking, not responding but instead echoing the question back to the questioner. And the facial expressions.... One of my friends said she would love to play poker with him, so many tells.

Bet his daughters will be forbidden to go to frat parties or date guys from all-male schools.

Maybe he was doing his best to model his nominator who did the same thing the day before. Filibustering the questions and referring to himself with plenty of snark, and disdain mocking everyone.

the perfect stall . make unsubstantiated accusations with no corraborative witness and ask the accused to call for an FBI investigation to prove the accusation wrong.

Senator Spartacus had his finest moment . He uncovered the truth that Kavanaugh had a beer after a football game .

Quote:

---

the perfect stall . make unsubstantiated accusations with no corraborative witness and ask the accused to call for an FBI investigation to prove the accusation wrong.

---

I guess it is a stall since you guys are in a hurry, but a statement by the POTENTIAL corroborative witness signed by his lawyer, NOT HIM, bears a closer look but of course repubs can't have that can they. Instead we get the big distraction from why the FBI cannot look into the new allegations, yet repub staffers can. That doesn't pass the smell test, so you guys are still holding your nose about anything the dufus does and following his every wish.

Quote:

---

Senator Spartacus had his finest moment . He uncovered the truth that Kavanaugh had a beer after a football game .

---

You believe Kavanaugh had a beer after the game? Probably had a case before and during.

Quote:

---

the perfect stall . make unsubstantiated accusations with no corraborative witness and ask the accused to call for an FBI investigation to prove the accusation wrong.

---

It's even worse than that. Make unsubstantiated accusations which are actually contradicted by four of your primary witnesses. How much plainer can it get?

They weren't allowed to call ANY corroborative witnesses remember. Though she couldn't remember a lot of things she remembers her attacker, Judge, and the way they laughed when the exited the room to join the others. She named the people there. They may have not been in the room but we could ask a lot of questions if repubs weren't trying to rush this through to please their dufus.

JL, no doubt you were holding your nose extra hard through Dr. Fords testimony. Especially the many times he declined to answer the question of dems about the FBI clearing his name. An innocent man would want his name cleared. Kind of obvious the GOP is not that confident he would be cleared by closer scrutiny.

Quote:

---

They weren't allowed to call ANY corroborative witnesses remember.

---

Who'd you have in mind??

Quote:

---

JL, no doubt you were holding your nose extra hard through Dr. Fords testimony. Especially the many times he declined to answer the question of dems about the FBI clearing his name.

---

Dr. Ford is a "he"? I guess you meant Kavanaugh. As was explained about ten times, the FBI does not clear names or draw conclusions. They only provide witness interrogation reports.

By the way, when will the hearing for Cory Booker's admitted groping of a girl in high school be held? Or the hearing for Finestein's staff releasing Dr. Ford's name to public?

I know what the FBI does. They investigate and report FACTS so others charged with making decisions from those facts can do their job effectively. So lets get after it starting with Mark Judge whom Dr. Ford puts in the room. That's as logical and reasonable as it gets. Just from the testimony of Ford and Kavanaugh's journal we have a better timeline, possible dates, and a place to start looking for some relevant details. What are you guys so afraid of? Depending on Senate staffers for FACTS is a ludicrous notion by any measure of reason or logic.

It's logical and reasonable as new things come to light to have the due diligence of professional scrutiny.

If you want to investigate the leaks of Ford's letter GO AHEAD. You want to investigate Ellison, Go ahead. You want to investigate the dufus. GO AHEAD! If one cannot stand the spotlight of scrutiny, then they should get a different job.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1M80Z1

https://www.businessinsider.com/amer...stigate-2018-9

"Each appointment to our nation's Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote," Carlson added. "Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court." News of the ABA's letter, which was addressed to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California — both of whom sit on the Judiciary Committee — comes hours after Kavanaugh testified on Capitol Hill before the committee Thursday. During his testimony, Kavanaugh touted his "unanimous, well-qualified rating" from the ABA.

QUESTIONS?

Well time to convene another star chamber

so who can tell me how many questions the Dems asked Kavanaugh about the allegations by Dr Ford ?

Doesn't matter, repubs have the majority so they call the shots. The dufus said confirm his pick so what else matters?

No one mentioned that the drinking age in Maryland in July 1982 was changed from 18 to 21. On Feb. 12, 1982, Kavanaugh had turned 17 and was underage even under the old law of age 18.

yeah he was an underage drinker . clearly that disqualifies . The answer to my question is ZERO . Not one question about the incident was asked by the Dems . They had a lot to say about the FBI and year books and farts . But nothing about the allegations .

Still waiting on Tal to tell us which corroborating witnesses he wanted called. Might be a hard question to answer since there are none. Even Leland Keyser has contradicted Ford's statement. So who would they have called?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yeah he was an underage drinker . clearly that disqualifies . The answer to my question is ZERO . Not one question about the incident was asked by the Dems . They had a lot to say about the FBI and year books and farts . But nothing about the allegations .

---

I wouldn't disqualify him for underaged drinking, Don't all youngsters do that? I did at 12, but just would certainly look into the credible claim of sexual assault raised by Dr. Ford. I never thought he was a choir boy in the first place and that's not the only question I have about this butt kisser either.

Spare me the rest of your posts since repubs didn't have the courage to question Dr. Ford themselves, nor allow the hand picked female prosecutor to question the judge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Still waiting on Tal to tell us which corroborating witnesses he wanted called. Might be a hard question to answer since there are none. Even Leland Keyser has contradicted Ford's statement. So who would they have called?

---

You must have missed my post about Mark Judge being a person of particular interest, and I'll hold my peace on the rest for now until we get more than an attorney statement. They are meaning less without direct testimony.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0425e3c233aeb

Quote:

---

Gerken echoed the ABA, which on Thursday urged the committee to delay a confirmation vote on Kavanaugh.

“We make this request because of the ABA’s respect for the rule of law and due process under law,” it said in a letter to the committee. “The basic principles that underscore the Senate’s constitutional duty of advice and consent on federal judicial nominees require nothing less than a careful examination of the accusations and facts by the FBI.”

---

The resistance for yo' boy mounts.

If Mark Judge is the best you can come up with, then your cause is lost. He has completely contradicted Ford's account.

Kavanaugh's nomination has passed and will be presented to the full senate for vote... supposedly after a FBI investigation on the allegations. Flake is a no vote until then! You go Jeff.

win win . If the Kavanaugh nomination gets derailed next up

Amy Coney Barrett. Wait until you get a load of her !