Abuse accustations against Supreme Court nominee Judge Kavanaugh

[Taunton Blue Genie]

It was an impossible situation for both of them. The democrats were running a character assassination and weren't interested in observing the rule of law, while the republicans employed a softer approach towards the accuser, who incidentally would have been shredded before a competant prosecutor. Today was a very sad day for eveybody involved, and especially for politics where the win at all costs ugliness has been laid bare for all to see.

Yes but one of them is lying. And why is he struggling so much to prove his integrity? Some of his responses are excrutiating.

[Wales-Bales]

Yes but one of them is lying. And why is he struggling so much to prove his integrity? Some of his responses are excrutiating.

Because it was a character assassination and not a trial. Nobody would survive that process the way it was orchestrated and setup.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Because it was a character assassination and not a trial. Nobody would survive that process the way it was orchestrated and setup.

I have watched every second so far and he is, without doubt, dishonest, evasive and narcissistic.

[Wales-Bales]

I have watched every second so far and he is, without doubt, dishonest, evasive and narcissistic.

They were pressing to get the FBI involved at every given opportunity, hence there was a microscopic analysis of his every word and action which led to him being overcautious to the point of being excruciating. The Democrats playbook involved geting his confirmation delayed until after the midterms, in the hope that they could win the house and stop the republican nomination. In football parlance, Kavanaugh parked the bus and refused to play their game. It's possible that something may have happened to that woman, but I'm just not convinced that it was Kavanaugh who did it. BTW I don't think this matter is finished yet, still more to come..

[Taunton Blue Genie]

They were pressing to get the FBI involved at every given opportunity, hence there was a microscopic analysis of his every word and action which led to him being overcautious to the point of being excruciating. The Democrats playbook involved geting his confirmation delayed until after the midterms, in the hope that they could win the house and stop the republican nomination. In football parlance, Kavanaugh parked the bus and refused to play their game. It's possible that something may have happened to that woman, but I'm just not convinced that it was Kavanaugh who did it. BTW I don't think this matter is finished yet, still more to come..

He is still dishonest about his past. And his performance was positively juvenile on many occasions. Hardly what you would expect of someone in his position.

[Veg1960]

He is still dishonest about his past. And his performance was positively juvenile on many occasions. Hardly what you would expect of someone in his position.

I liked the "We should pray for the woman" bit

Reminded me of Little House oh the Prarie

[Wales-Bales]

Yes but one of them is lying. And why is he struggling so much to prove his integrity? Some of his responses are excrutiating.

This is not a neutral statement, you have have clearly expressed an opinion that one of them is lying, and you are already showing a hint of bias against Kavanaugh.

I have watched every second so far and he is, without doubt, dishonest, evasive and narcissistic.

This backs up my first point

And only one of them has taken a polygraph test.

You are implying that Ford has passed a polygraph test, so it must be Kavanaugh who is lying?

That isn't correct though, is it? Being aware of things and them existing are two different things.

I'm struggling with this one. You cannot be aware of something that does not exist.

And don't forget that she not only passed the polygraph but has called for the FBI to establish some of the circumstantial evidence. On the other hand, he has reacted quite differently. He has been lying through his teeth about his semi-angelic youth and he has clearly shown that he is unsuitable for the job whatever.

Here we are back to you insinuating that he must be the one who is lying, hence Ford is not lying.

The polygraph would be of no relevance whatsoever if it didn't include any mention of him.

Again implying that she must be the one who is truthful. In reality they won't hand over the test details. Why is that?

Have you just answered your question? Even if you don't think you did I have to keep reminding you that she WANTS further investigation to establish the truth. On the other hand, he doesn't. I'll be amazed if he survives this as more statements about him are coming on record every day. Like many events in politics it's not necessarily the original incident that sinks a politician but the lies in covering up those incidents.

Yet more taking sides and distorting of the the truth. Kavanaugh said it was up to the Judiciary Committee to decide if there should be any further investigations. He wasn't against it at all.

Kavanaugh's supporters would have jumped on any talk of a polygraph that didn't include any mention of Kavanaugh (and for very obvious reason).

https://www.scribd.com/document/3895...s-2#from_embed

How could they when the Ford lawyers won't release them? You seem to be hoping this is true to pin the guilt on Kavanaugh.

The opportunity for the FBI to get involved would obviously present a better opportunity to establish some of the claims on both sides. Ignoring information that can be gleaned outside the current sessions is hardly justice and rather negligent concerning a very serious subject. Some of the Democrats have been asking for just one week's grace.

Now you are pushing the Democrat talking points. Are you sure you are not showing bias here?

Not sure of the fine detail. There are certainly some inconsistencies with some things on her side. However, she still came over as more credible that the pompous, egotistical and untruthful judge. Her case may never be proven but he has shown what he is made of....and beyond reasonable doubt.

Now you are saying that Ford is more credible than Kavanaugh. That is an opinion, yet you said you haven't formed one.

Interviewing third parties from whom they have merely received statements handed on a plate hitherto. The biggest omission being his alleged accomplice.

You seem to be constructing roadblocks here. The statements were made under penalty of perjury.

I have mentioned inconsistencies on her side and there are many on his. You seem to be the one with the blinkers on as you not only misconstrue what I wrote but your views have been totally unilateral so far. My main perspective is that he is dishonest about his past, which should preclude him from taking up the position he seeks.

What inconstancies have you mentioned about Ford? Hardly any as far as I can see, but you have been consistently against Kavanaugh and you are certain that he is the one who is lying, and we established from your first statement that only one of them is telling the truth!

Let's not personalise this and stick to what is relevant. The guy has repeatedly been dishonest about his youth and rather than take the opportunity to be honest now he has repeatedly lied, obfuscated, re-emphasised his lies in TV interviews and responded to questions with narcissistic rants, idiotic comments and petulant responses. He has painted himself whiter than white and it appears that it's just not true. If I was an American I would be very concerned that someone so dishonest and manipulative could be considered for the post he aspires to.

Ok, I get it! It's Kavanaugh who is lying!

The last couple of days have been about the guy's suitability for a very important post. It's obvious that party politics are hugely involved but his integrity is shot.

So that the fact that Ford may be framing him is irrelevant?

Please don't go off at tangents regarding statements I make regarding the credibility of Kavanaugh. I don't wish to align myself with your views in general.

So I shouldn't mention your extreme bias? And you talk about self-awareness!

[cyril evans awaydays]

This is not a neutral statement, you have have clearly expressed an opinion that one of them is lying, and you are already showing a hint of bias against Kavanaugh.


This backs up my first point


You are implying that Ford has passed a polygraph test, so it must be Kavanaugh who is lying?


I'm struggling with this one. You cannot be aware of something that does not exist.


Here we are back to you insinuating that he must be the one who is lying, hence Ford is not lying.


Again implying that she must be the one who is truthful. In reality they won't hand over the test details. Why is that?


Yet more taking sides and distorting of the the truth. Kavanaugh said it was up to the Judiciary Committee to decide if there should be any further investigations. He wasn't against it at all.


How could they when the Ford lawyers won't release them? You seem to be hoping this is true to pin the guilt on Kavanaugh.


Now you are pushing the Democrat talking points. Are you sure you are not showing bias here?


Now you are saying that Ford is more credible than Kavanaugh. That is an opinion, yet you said you haven't formed one.


You seem to be constructing roadblocks here. The statements were made under penalty of perjury.


What inconstancies have you mentioned about Ford? Hardly any as far as I can see, but you have been consistently against Kavanaugh and you are certain that he is the one who is lying, and we established from your first statement that only one of them is telling the truth!


Ok, I get it! It's Kavanaugh who is lying!


So that the fact that Ford may be framing him is irrelevant?



So I shouldn't mention your extreme bias? And you talk about self-awareness!

If you want to take this polemicism lark seriously I'd invest in a good skin thickening cream.

[Wales-Bales]

If you want to take this polemicism lark seriously I'd invest in a good skin thickening cream.

You always have a lot things to say, but I can't recall you ever saying one thing that I didn't already know!

[cyril evans awaydays]

You always have a lot things to say, but I can't recall you ever saying one thing that I didn't already know!

What, not even correcting the bollocks you posted on ICE-1?

[Wales-Bales]

Apologies for my not noticing that you had also flagged up all the inconsistencies about his descriptions about his general behaviour in his youth (which are probably outright lies) that I mentioned and which I thought made him unsuitable for the post he is seeking. I must have missed that.

And how can everyone's views be considered as 'embedded' when people like me have neither declared him guilty of the alleged the offence nor accused her of lying as yet?

You posed this as a rhetorical question, is it any wonder that I didn't answer? And then you went all passive aggressive on me!