Originally posted by One Bad Pig
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAgain, I don't think they ever imagined it would get this far - I think they figured the Republicans would just cave, and they wouldn't even have had to make her name public.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostI don't think they were that delusional. They had to know that, once the existence of the allegation was made known, journalists of all stripes would work non-stop to figure out who it was.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
I've read part of this thread - but not all of it. FWIW, here's what I think.
I don't know. If the event happened as described, denying it and vilifying the woman is disgraceful. If the event did not happen as described, affirming it and slandering an innocent man is disgraceful.
I have no desire to be disgraceful - and I have no desire to harm anyone that is innocent. So I have no choice but to say "I don't know."
There is no room in this, for me, for partisanship. I'm not going to line up behind one or the other claimant because they are "on my side." I am not going to villify anyone because they are "not on my side." This is about real, potentially hurtful issues.
The best I can do is, "I don't know."The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI've read part of this thread - but not all of it. FWIW, here's what I think.
I don't know. If the event happened as described, denying it and vilifying the woman is disgraceful. If the event did not happen as described, affirming it and slandering an innocent man is disgraceful.
I have no desire to be disgraceful - and I have no desire to harm anyone that is innocent. So I have no choice but to say "I don't know."
There is no room in this, for me, for partisanship. I'm not going to line up behind one or the other claimant because they are "on my side." I am not going to villify anyone because they are "not on my side." This is about real, potentially hurtful issues.
The best I can do is, "I don't know."
DiFi had the information since JULY, and she was the ranking minority member, but it never came up a single time during the orderly process.
It's not like they suddenly discovered a problem AFTER the process.
To me, that's a huge problem.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI've read part of this thread - but not all of it. FWIW, here's what I think.
I don't know. If the event happened as described, denying it and vilifying the woman is disgraceful. If the event did not happen as described, affirming it and slandering an innocent man is disgraceful.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostI suspect its not her who wants the circus.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI've read part of this thread - but not all of it. FWIW, here's what I think.
I don't know. If the event happened as described, denying it and vilifying the woman is disgraceful. If the event did not happen as described, affirming it and slandering an innocent man is disgraceful.
I have no desire to be disgraceful - and I have no desire to harm anyone that is innocent. So I have no choice but to say "I don't know."
There is no room in this, for me, for partisanship. I'm not going to line up behind one or the other claimant because they are "on my side." I am not going to villify anyone because they are "not on my side." This is about real, potentially hurtful issues.
The best I can do is, "I don't know."Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostShe caused the circus, now she wants to avoid it?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Terraceth View PostI think that, assuming she believes her own accusation, she's in a tough position. Obviously, if you think (correctly or incorrectly) that someone sexually assaulted you and is about to go onto the Supreme Court, you'd want to try to have people be aware of that fact. However, doing so would inherently draw a ton of attention, and likely criticism, on yourself. If that's the case, there weren't really any good options for her. She even sent the letter well before the hearings, and if it was handled then there would have likely been less of this "circus", but Feinstein decided to sit on it for months before doing anything with it.
Comment
-
Kavanaugh's second accuser is refusing to cooperate with the Senate in any way. No written statement, no testimony, nothing.
I like their bluff about wanting to cooperate with the FBI when they already know full well this is outside of the FBI's jurisdiction. And we can't forget the fact that like Ford's accusations, every single witness named by Ramirez has refuted her claims.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
You know, I almost agreed with an FBI investigation, but then I remembered what Joe Biden said about FBI investigations regarding Supreme Court nominees...
"The reason why I have worked so hard to keep FBI reports totally secret is because they have little or no probative weight, because they are hearsay," Biden said. "The FBI does their interviews by walking up to person A and saying will you speak to us, and the guarantee is anonymity. That is what the FBI tells the person, and the FBI speaks to the person. Now, for us to summarily go back and say, as a matter of policy, that we are going to break the commitment the Federal Government makes to an individual, in order to get that individual to cooperate in an investigation, is disastrous."
"And the last thing I will point out, the next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn't understand anything," Biden later said. "FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case reach a conclusion, period, period. So, Judge, there is no reason why you should know this. The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report, you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive. They say he said, she said, and they said, period. So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions. They do not make, as my friend points out more accurately, they do not make recommendations."
Full Article Here
Sorry, I don't know how to do the cool "Source" block...Last edited by Alsharad; 09-25-2018, 10:20 PM.
Comment
-
OK, this just keeps getting funnier... now there are rumors that Avenatti was pranked by 4chan, and that's why he so suddenly locked his Twitter account.
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostAs for this...
Sketchy sketchy sketchy...
Did you even read the story? Or did you just read the misleading bullet points at the top? First, he says he didn't witness the incident:
"Roche claims that although he did not witness the alleged incident, he was inclined to agree with Ramirez based on his experience around Kavanaugh."
And what experience do you suppose that is when Roche admits that he "did not interact with Kavanaugh 'beyond the first few days of freshman year'"? Yet we're supposed to believe that he has some deep insight into Kavanaugh's character despite openly conceding that he barely knew the guy.
Of course the article buries these details almost a dozen paragraphs below the headline. Like I said, sketchy sketchy sketchy...
The FBI is responsible for doing background checks on nominees for high office and all these women (now there are three) say they have information they would like to provide to the FBI for that purpose as it relates to Brett Kavanaugh. This so the FBI can assess what these women have to say...and that is something no lawyer would ever advise a client to do if there was any worry at all that the client`s story was a lie.
As well there are other matters requiring attention from the FBI. Kavanaugh needs to be asked about the claims on his yearbook page. Lots of stuff one wouldn't expect a naive virgin "all through high school (as he claimed on Fox), to have ANY knowledge about, e.g. Kavanaugh's claim of a "Devil's Triangle" in his yearbook blurb. According to the Urban Dictionary, that's a term for a 2-guy, 1-girl, 3-way sex encounter. The odious sexist Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's good friend at the time needs to be questioned by the FBI, given that he was supposedly in the room at the time...there are many such questions which the Senate Committee is trying to brush under the carpet.He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it. - Douglas Adams.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
139 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Today, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
364 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
112 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
197 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
364 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Today, 11:08 AM
|
Comment