Are we supposed to believe the accuser just because she said the accused sexually harassed her about 35 years later despite having not a scintilla of evidence?
Any courtroom in America would laugh her out the court.
Are we supposed to believe the accuser just because she said the accused sexually harassed her about 35 years later despite having not a scintilla of evidence?
Any courtroom in America would laugh her out the court.
Are we supposed to believe the accuser just because she said the accused sexually harassed her about 35 years later despite having not a scintilla of evidence?
Any courtroom in America would laugh her out the court.
Are we supposed to believe the accuser just because she said the accused sexually harassed her
No, we're not supposed to just believe it. We're supposed to consider it, and then do what's right and necessary. That's called: an investigation.
There is precedent for this. In 1991, GHW Bush ordered a federal investigation into the background claims against Clarence Thomas during his SC confirmation proceedings.
This is what's supposed to happen in a functioning government.
There has been a stink hanging over this rush-job of a confirmation process since Day One. Only 10% of the guy's paper trail produced. A 40K-page memo dump 8 hours before the start of hearings. And now this. Mitch McConnell even URGED 45* to pick someone- almost ANYONE else besides Kavanaugh because of the sheer volume of paper trail hanging off this d00d's shoe. DOOFUS ooops- POTUS chose him anyway ("I like him. He wants to get me off-")... and now, everyone on Team Elephant is working overtime to spray Glade air freshener all around this guy.
The FBI's investigation into Clarence Thomas lasted exactly THREE DAYS... so I ask this question: what's three days... to be sure about someone who's about to take a lifetime position? It was important enough to people back in '91, that the President ordered a federal investigation of his own nominee.
Clarence Thomas was exonerated of the allegations and less than a month later, was confirmed 52/48 as an associate justice.
So what's the big freaking problem with doing it again?
What's so striking about this piece of history is how much more honorable and less craven Republicans were 30 years ago. That committee deadlocked at 7-7 and sent Thomas to the floor of the Senate with no recommendation. They were part of an open transparent process. A process that resulted in the confirmation of a right-leaning justice.
This bunch is every bit as sketchy as the Joke who nominated him.
This is what's supposed to happen in a functioning government.
When the Democrats announced before a SC candidate was even chosen, saying they would stop at nothing to keep Trumps pick from making it to the Supreme Court, government ceased to function as anarchy reigned.
That is not government functioning. That leads thinking people to realize the Democrats are committed to stopping ANY pick, by ANY means.
And you wonder why so many are questioning the validity of her claim.
You really don't mind being the family embarrassment, do you?
"Mr. President, where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is a partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. As a result, it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed."
-Judiciary Chairman Senator Joe Biden June 25, 1992
I don't know exactly who you are talking to here, but let me assure you: I take sexual assault very seriously, as I do rape, or attempted rape.
Very seriously.
However, in this case - this POLITICAL situation - I find it difficult to accept.
37 years. No rape. No attempted rape. No witnesses.
A lady that sat on this for decades and only decides to come out with it now? For what?
If an assault is provable - have at it. In this case, it isn't.
Give the FBI a week to investigate.
See, what you seem to fail to either realize or admit, not sure which, is that sexual assault is the most under reported crimes there is. That's not a guess, that's a fact. Now can you prove a crime has been committed 37 years after the fact? That would be virtually impossible and nobody knows if a crime was committed or not in this case.
But see, you've still come to a logical conclusion here.
Let's look at reality here. The entire GOP blew off the puZZy grabbing thing as "locker room talk". I mean I've never seen a man in his 60's in a locker room talking this way, but whatever. lmao
But since then? It's been proven that those around Trump have paid off both a porn star and a playboy bunny for having sex with them. All while he was married to Melania. That's not a good look.
Let me give you a little food for thought here..........
Trump won Michigan by an average of two voters per precinct. He won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan by a grand total of 77,744 votes. And that was against a terrible candidate in Hillary. A candidate who had spent years under investigation with very questionable character at best. lol
The most positive statistic I've been able to find claims Trump won 41% of women's votes in 2016. I've seen lower percentages but none higher so I'm giving this the benefit of the doubt here in his favor.
Let me ask you this...... How many more votes from women can Trump afford to lose and possibly win in 2020? While it's a sad fact, it's a fact none the less that many voters place their votes based on perception.
That's why my conclusion that the smartest move the GOP could make is to put out a statement that they take sexual assault accusations very seriously. That they feel it's only right and fair to look into any and all such accusations.
To take the current route they're taking can only hurt them, not help them. No matter how we feel about the two parties involved.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme...sm_npd_ms_fb_ma Spokesman for GOP on Kavanaugh nomination resigns; has been accused of harassment in the past “ A press adviser helping lead the Senate Judiciary Committee’s response to a sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has stepped down amid evidence he was fired from a previous political job in part because of a sexual harassment allegation against him.“
It’s ike a Russian nesting doll of deplorables on that side. Does the GOP have anyone in their ranks that isn’t a total sexual creep?
Democrats float more Kavanaugh investigations, impeachment even if he is confirmed
As the political fight over the sexual assault allegation made against Brett Kavanaugh intensifies, Democrats are indicating that -- even if confirmed -- they intend to drag the fight over his Supreme Court nomination past November, raising the possibility of an impeachment push.
Democrats float more Kavanaugh investigations, impeachment even if he is confirmed
As the political fight over the sexual assault allegation made against Brett Kavanaugh intensifies, Democrats are indicating that -- even if confirmed -- they intend to drag the fight over his Supreme Court nomination past November, raising the possibility of an impeachment push.
GOP voter on Kavanaugh: What boy hasn't done this in high school?
I wonder how they would feel if their 15 year old girl had an illegal Mexican boy or a Black kid do this to them? I bet it would be life altering then.
Trump wanted to send 5 black kids to prison for something they were innocent of after he found out they were innocent!
i sure haven't done no crap like that in high school, or ever.
wowzers...
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Another person claimed by Christine Blasey Ford to have attended a gathering decades ago during which, Ford claims, she was sexually assaulted by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has denied any recollection of having attended the party.
In an email to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Saturday, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford's at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, said she doesn’t know Kavanugh or remember being at the party with him.
“Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,” lawyer Howard J. Walsh III of Bethesda, Md., conveyed in an email to the committee that was obtained by Fox News.
Politico reported that the email was in response to a letter from a lawyer for the GOP majority staff, which said: "I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article."
In response, Ford’s lawyer Debra Katz said: “As Dr. Ford has said, she did not share her story publicly or with anyone for years following the incident with Judge Kavanaugh.
"It's not surprising that Ms. Keyser has no recollection of the evening as they did not discuss it. It's also unremarkable that Ms. Keyser does not remember attending a specific gathering 30 years ago at which nothing of consequence happened to her. Dr. Ford of course will never forget this gathering because of what happened to her there.”
Keyser’s denial brings to four the number of witnesses, including Kavanaugh, who’ve all said they have no memory of the party or the incident.
Other denials were issued earlier this week by Mark Judge and Patrick “PJ” Smith.
Ford alleges that Kavanaugh assaulted her during a housing party in high school in the 1980s.
Keyser is a former golf coach at Georgetown University and married to Bob Beckel, a political pundit and former Democratic operative, according to the Weekly Standard.
Ford's claims have rattled Washington and stalled Kavanaugh’s conformation process. Democrats have called for a delay on his confirmation vote to the Supreme Court pending an FBI investigation, something Republicans deem unnecessary.
President Trump called on Ford to provide a police report for the assault.
After much back and forth, a tentative agreement was reached for a Thursday hearing for Ford to discuss the alleged assault with the Judiciary Committee.
The Associated Press was told Kavanaugh would also appear and other terms of the agreement were still in negotiations.
In a statement Saturday, White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said:
“One week ago, Dr. Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party.”
If someone married to Bob Beckel, of all people, says she doesn't remember any of the account ..... man, that really has to make you think.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
In a statement Saturday, White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said:
“One week ago, Dr. Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party.”
Funny how the WH gathered these statements for the Senate... No witnesses will be called for hearings... No FBI investigation where lying is a fed crime... Just notes from Kavanaugh's friends denying there was even a party.
In a statement Saturday, White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said:
“One week ago, Dr. Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party.”
Funny how the WH gathered these statements for the Senate... No witnesses will be called for hearings... No FBI investigation where lying is a fed crime... Just notes from Kavanaugh's friends denying there was even a party.
Christine Blasey Ford's allegation that Brett Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her when they were teens has thrown his Supreme Court nomination into doubt. But as senators spar over the terms for a new hearing which may or may not happen, inconsistencies in the story have emerged that could embolden Kavanaugh's defenders.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has given Ford until Friday morning to say whether she will testify next week. Ford first aired her accusations in a Washington Post story over the weekend but has not spoken publicly about them since. Absent another statement or appearance, questions about the account have swirled on Capitol Hill.
"There are an awful lot of questions, inconsistencies, gaps, and that's why to be fair to both, we need to know what happened," Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a key Republican vote, told reporters this week.
Among those are therapist notes from 2012 that Ford gave to the Washington Post to corroborate her claim. Those notes, though, reportedly say four boys – not two, as Ford claims -- were in the room during the alleged incident. Ford told the newspaper this was an error by the therapist.
Ford, who has acknowledged she can’t remember some details from the incident decades ago, has said she was reluctant to come forward and only did so because her hand was forced by the media.
“As you know, earlier this summer, Dr. Ford sought to tell her story, in confidence, so that lawmakers would have a fuller understanding of Brett Kavanaugh’s character and history,” Ford’s attorneys wrote in a letter to the Judiciary Committee this week. “Only after the details of her experience were leaked did Dr. Ford make the reluctant decision to come forward publicly.”
But that claim of reluctance has raised questions about why Ford hired a well-known sexual harassment attorney and took a polygraph test ahead of time if she wasn’t prepared to make the public allegation.
“If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward, never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in August and why did she hire a lawyer in August if she never intended to do what she is doing?” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said on Fox News this week.
Meanwhile, those named by Ford as being present at the party in question in the 1980s have denied the allegations. That includes Kavanaugh, who has emphatically denied the claim, and Mark Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh’s named by Ford who disputes the claims and says he wasn’t at the party in the question.
Another former classmate of Kavanaugh denied having any knowledge of the party or allegations.
"I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Patrick Smyth said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."
Fueling more curiosity was a supposed former classmate of Ford who posted a statement on Facebook this week saying the “incident did happen” and it was “spoken about for days” afterwards “in school.”
But the post came under scrutiny because of Ford’s previous statements that the alleged incident occurred during the summer – and not during the school year – and that she didn’t discuss it with anyone until counseling with a therapist in 2012.
The classmate who posted the statement, Cristina King Miranda, eventually deleted the post on Wednesday, and clarified that, “I do not have firsthand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine.”
She later told NPR: "That it happened or not, I have no idea. I can't say that it did or didn't."
Ford’s legal team, meanwhile, has given differing statements about whether Ford is willing to testify. On Thursday afternoon, it was reported Ford had re-opened discussions with Republicans to testify.
During television appearances on Monday, Ford’s attorney Debra Katz indicated her client was willing to testify before the committee under oath.
But later in the week, after the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee invited Ford to testify on Monday in public or private, Ford’s attorneys said she wants the FBI to investigate the claims first – something Republicans reject and the bureau is not at this point expected to do.
All along, though, plenty of fellow alumni and Democratic lawmakers have voiced support for Ford, with Senate Democrats urging the majority to hit pause on the process.
"Dr. Ford’s call for the FBI to investigate also demonstrates her confidence that when all the facts are examined by an impartial investigation, her account will be further corroborated and confirmed," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., tweeted.
Members of Ford's family also released a statement Thursday offering "full support."
Despite conflicting details, senators on both sides of the aisle seem to recognize the intense pressure Ford is under. Hazy details about an episode decades ago may be expected and inconsistencies, by themselves, don't delegitimize her claims. One factor may be the abrupt and intense response -- some positive, but also some very negative -- that Ford has faced.
“She has been the target of vicious harassment and even death threats,” Katz and another lawyer, Lisa Banks, wrote. “As a result of these kind of threats, her family was forced to relocate out of their home.”
Her attorneys said she is open to “reasonable steps as to how Dr. Ford can cooperate while also taking care of her own health and security.”
President Trump said Wednesday he hopes Ford appears before the committee.
“If she shows up, that would be wonderful,” Trump said. “If she doesn't show up, that would be unfortunate.”
So it was a personal attack! 
No facts on the thread though. 
Adding zero to the thread topic. 
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)
