DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The Crucifixion of Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh accuser Swetnick faces credibility questions amid changing story, details from past

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kavanau...tails-from-past





-------------------------------------------------------

Ocasio-Cortez alleges Kavanaugh lied to Congress

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-alleges-kavanaugh-lied-to-congress

She did not elaborate on what statements she considered to be lies.

Democrat witch hunt.

In a shocking development, 40 doesn't seem to have an issue with a creepy pervert.

Who could have seen that coming?

40 has issue with Michael Avenatti, it's you who doesn't.

In an eerie way, you have no comment on the article/video.


It's so nice you are back.

Laughing out loud at "crucifixion".

We're talking about a mediocre drunk who spent his job interview alternating between shouting and crying while talking about how much he loved beer and sports, not Jesus Christ come back to life.

Now watch, you're going to play "remember when......."

Biting commentary from archbolddawg.

Biting or not, it's truth.

Do you have a point here, or are you just being Mad Online?

Get drunk and may or may not have touched women inappropriately when he was a teenager. What a creepy pervert....


If any of this could be proven, in the slightest, even circumstantially dems would have brought the heat because they have obviously been devising this plan for a while. Even the "proof" of his "lies" are extremely sloppy accounts where you have to WANT o believe he is lying because there is little to no proof.


How can you prove someone blacked out 30 years ago?

How can you prove that he "never attended a party like the one blasley described"?

How can you prove that he "did not run in the same social circles"?

How can you PROVE what he meant by boof?

How can you PROVE that your description of renate animus was what he "Actually" meant.




It changed from "this guy drugged and raped women" to "this guy sexually assaulted Dr. Ford" to "he lied about how much he drinks". Any reasonable person can see this has turned into nonsense time. Maybe he lied under oath, it's possible, maybe he assaulted Ford, it's possible. It's also possible this entire situation is a "resistance" stall tactic and a complete to partial fabrication.

The Burden of proof is on the accuser not the defendant. If he did something, I cannot see how you could possibly prove it other than a very loose circumstantial case.

He spent his job interview fluctuating between anger and tears while describing how much he liked beer.

He's not on trial for a crime, he's up for a prestigious job, and he's failed that test with dismal colors.

Not to mention, he doesn't even have the paper bonafides. He barely squeaked through on his federal appointment, which was delayed repeatedly until there were enough seats to pass him.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface as to whether or not you believe Ford (composed, credible) or Kavanaugh (erratic, lying constantly).

Garbage if he had been composed and credible you would have said that was bad. That part, IS the definition of a witch hunt....if he gets mad he's guilty, if he doesn't he's guilty.


Liking Beer and getting upset people are calling you a rapist isn't an argument.

I didn't and don't want Gorsuch on the court because I oppose him ideologically.

But facts are facts, reality is reality, and he had the pedigree needed to fly through seamlessly.

Kavanaugh has a medicore record, no landmark decision writing, is an obvious liar with zero evidence of being a deep or reasoned thinker, and, by all objective evidence, a creep and most likely a sexual predator.

Simply put, he's absolutely not qualified for the job. Period.

Anything else is white noise.

Also, "isn't an argument" reminds me of that bald moron with a goatee whose name escapes me. Which makes sense.

EDIT: The moron's name is Stefan Molyneux.



I also love the "not an argument" part of your post was the notion that "wouldn't anybody go on unhinged rants filled with white lies about how much you liked beer if they were accused of sexual assault?"

Kavanaugh clash reopens stolen valor allegations against Sen. Blumenthal


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kavanau...-sen-blumenthal

Lol ... Not even close. You all just love these pervs more than Jesus.

I can't tell if they genuinely identify with weird creeps, or they're just towing the line.

(This is something that happens within every ideology, but Jesus, they are stretching it lately)

both

I think (or would like to think) it's mostly the latter.

There's a few posters (like 2 or 3) here who are truly creepy in regards to their sentiments regarding perverts and predators, but for the most part, I think it's horse-blinder "this guy is on my team, so I have to go to bat for him" knee-jerk that sounds incredibly creepy, but is really just reactionary.

Desperate or just vacant?

You decide.

(Also, laughing out loud at Vambo choosing Tom Cotton for a voice to cite)

I thought this thread was going to be about Kanye

At this rate, it's probably the name of his next recorded-in-half-an-hour album.

Drunk_and_hot_girls_ft_BartKav.mp3

This is the third time you've posted this.

For the third time, 3 out of 4 of them are Photoshopped.

Anyone with half a brain would instantly realize that.

I'd ask how gullible you are, but you post Breitbart links regularly.

Vambo on a Roll Tonight!

All you need is to accuse ask anyone on the Left.

...........
...........
...... .........
...... .........
...... .........
...... .........
...... .........
...... .........
...... .........
...........
...........

This is gibberish.

What are you trying to say here?

My wife *Borat/Vambo voice*

"It ain't easy being white"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh_vIlp-300

Honestly, I'm still laughing at "The Crucifixion of Kanavaugh".

Imagine having your brain microwaved into goo so badly that you'd compare Christ to a weird angry drunk, because a weird white supremacy website told you to feel that way.

Louis CK slammed by fellow comedian over 'comeback' from sex misconduct allegations

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/lo...uct-allegations

I'm in awe at how you chose the creepiest response possible.

For those not in the know, I used to work with Louis, and he once sexually assaulted a co-worker in 2003. She tearfully told me about it once.

I talked about it a decade later on this board.

At this time, 40 was in the midst of embarrassing himself by calling a serial rapist "tough" & "cool", and a pedophile "honorable", and Trump "brave". He got mocked for it, repeatedly.

I often led the charge, and 40's response was almost always a version of "Oh, yeah, remember that time your friend told you Louis CK sexually assaulted her? And you didn't immediately call the police?"

I've personally waffled on whether or not that makes him crazy or mean, but, Jesus...

It's hard to read the 17th version of "oh, yeah, well your friend got sexually assaulted once!" as a retort and not find it goosebump-creepy.

This is what 40 types when he just got socked in the proverbial mouth and doesn't know which link to copy and paste to explain what his retort is for him.

FBI's Kavanaugh investigation may wrap up as soon as Wednesday, source says

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbis-ka...day-source-says

The FBI may wrap up its investigation into misconduct accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh as soon as late Wednesday, a source tells Fox News, potentially clearing the way for a final Senate vote on his confirmation within days.

If the FBI's report is indeed delivered to the White House on Wednesday, Fox News expects a vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation could come as soon as Saturday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., must first satisfy a number of procedural and parliamentary hurdles before a vote can be held, including filing a cloture petition (which must remain pending for a full day) in order to formally end debate on Kavanaugh's nomination. McConnell has vowed to hold a vote by the end of the week.

Republicans command a narrow 51-49 majority in the Senate, giving them little margin for error. Numerous key swing-vote senators, including West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin, Maine Republican Susan Collins, and Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski, have said they will withhold judgment on Kavanaugh pending the results of the FBI's supplemental background investigation.

The FBI's conclusions have been hotly anticipated since Friday, when Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., insisted on an additional review by the agency in a dramatic Judiciary Committee hearing. Top Democrats had demanded the FBI interview more than two dozen witnesses as part of the investigation, saying a time-limited, narrow probe -- which Flake had requested -- would lack legitimacy.

However, McConnell, R-Ky., characterized those requests as transparent stall tactics in a fiery floor speech on Monday.

"If you listen carefully, Mr. President, you can practically hear the sounds of the Democrats moving the goalposts," McConnell said. He added later: "Their goalposts keep shifting. But their goal hasn't moved an inch. Not an inch.

"Do these actions suggest this has ever been about finding the truth?" McConnell asked. "Anybody believe that?"

The uncorroborated sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh have faltered in recent days, as the credibility of his three most prominent accusers -- Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick -- has come under question. Democrats increasingly have focused their arguments on Kavanaugh's temperament during Thursday's hearing, as well as whether he lied under oath about references in his high school yearbook. Kavanaugh also acknowleged sometimes having "too many" beers in high school and college, and some Democrats have suggested he lied by not going further and admitting that he had "blacked out."

The FBI's report is virtually sure to spark more of the partisan angst it was ostensibly intended to quell. Ford's legal team complained publicly on Tuesday that the FBI had not reached out to her. Ford, who said Kavanaugh forcibly assaulted her at a house gathering more than three decades ago, testified at length under oath on Thursday.

Also on Tuesday, John Clune, who represents Ramirez, said that his client spoke with the FBI for more than two hours on Sunday and had provided them with additional witnesses to contact. However, Clune wrote on Twitter, he is not aware that the FBI has reached out to those individuals, and he voiced his "great concern that the FBI is not conducting—or not being permitted to conduct—a serious investigation."

Apparently responding to those complaints Tuesday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, accused Democrats of improper meddling in the process.

“The FBI conducts background investigations in accordance with the agency’s standard operating procedures, and it has done so six previous times for Judge Kavanaugh," Grassley wrote. "I’m confident that the FBI agents tasked with this responsibility will not succumb to public political pressure or politicians telling the agency how to do its job. Respectfully, the career public servants and professionals at the FBI know what they’re doing and how best to conduct a background investigation."

In a memo released Sunday, experienced sex-crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell flagged numerous inconsistencies in Ford's testimony, saying that her case against Kavanaugh was even weaker than the typical "he said, she said" scenario. Specifically, Mitchell noted that Ford repeatedly changed her story as to the number of people at the party where she allegedly was assaulted, and could not remember certain key details like how she got home or whether she had given her therapist notes to The Washington Post just two months ago.

None of the witnesses Ford named as present at the house, including her lifelong best friend, has backed her claims. Additionally, Ford admitted under questioning by Mitchell that she travels regularly on airplanes, even though her team had cited a fear of travel as a reason she could not promptly come to Washington, D.C. to testify. Ford also indicated under oath she was not aware that Senate Republicans had publicly and privately offered to fly to California to interview her -- a disparity that Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., vowed to investigate.

And Swetnick seemingly has changed her story on whether she had first-hand knowledge that Kavanaugh intentionally plied women with alcohol so that they could be gang-raped decades ago. One of Swetnick's ex-boyfriends also has questioned her credibility, exclusively telling Fox News that she once threatened to murder his unborn child and "exaggerated everything" to get attention.

A separate ex-boyfriend has also said in a sworn statement to the Judiciary Committee that he does not believe Swetnick, and claimed that Swetnick's father intimated she has mental health issues.

Swetnick's lawyer, Michael Avenatti, has called repeatedly for the FBI and Senate investigators to interview his client, even as major inconsistencies in her account continued to surface Tuesday. Swetnick was sued in 2000 by her former employer for allegedly falsifying her educational experience, and she also was accused of fabricating sexual harassment episodes.

On Tuesday, Mike Davis, who works as the nominations counsel for Grassley, reportedly told Avenatti: "We have already reviewed your client's allegations. We focus on credible allegations. Please stop emailing me."

-----------------------------------------------------

Vambo researches bizarre versions of twisted GOPer truth spin:

Clinton accuser Juanita Broaddrick demands FBI probe on Clinton rape claim, amid Kavanaugh furor

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/clinton...kavanaugh-furor