Political discussions about everything
#108519
Rachel Mitchell, the sex-crimes prosecutor who questioned Dr. Christine Blasey Ford last week, wrote in a memo released late Sunday that there were several inconsistencies in Ford's testimony and that all evidence known at this point indicates Kavanaugh is innocent. She identified Ford's case as an example of “he said, she said,” and said her case is “even weaker than that.”
#108521
Republicans melting down over Kavanaugh's self-incriminating evidence

"As even he admitted, the calendars would not on their own constitute proof of his innocence. But in fact, they did not even suggest his innocence. Because, as Washington Post writer Philip Bump notes, Kavanaugh's timeline is, in fact, consistent with Ford's testimony — and even suggests the date of the house party at which the assault allegedly took place: July 1, 1982."
#108522
Kavanaugh's timeline is, in fact, consistent with Ford's testimony — and even suggests the date of the house party at which the assault allegedly took place: July 1, 1982."
LOL, what timeline you talking about? Are you saying Kavanaugh admits to being in high school during the 3 years she thinks it happened?
Mitchell, who worked as a sex-crimes prosecutor for nearly 25 years in Arizona, pointed out what she identified as timing inconsistencies. She wrote that Ford appeared to jump around on the timing of the alleged sexual assault, ranging from the “mid 1980s” to “early 1980s,” and then the “summer of 1982.”

“While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the timeframe to a particular season and particular year, but this was only after Kavanaugh said the only summer he stayed in the area was the summer of 82.” she wrote.

Mitchell also pointed out that Ford has a history of struggling to name Kavanaugh as her attacker. Mitchell noted that his name was not in notes from her 2012 marriage therapy or her individual therapy in 2013.
#108523
No person in any position of power or authority, from a college dean to a mayor to a senator, is safe if any claim with no evidence is deemed credible.

Yes, the Left is frantic to derail Trump's agenda, but you have to have evidence.

If there were solid evidence, I'd be the first to say bring on the lady judge who is the likely next nominee.

But it is disgraceful and disgusting for Feinstein to ruin the reputation of a good man with zero evidence.
#108530
The fact is the committee voted to forward Kavanaugh's nomination for a final vote...that can't be undone, no matter what new allegations are made. The vote will be held after next week. Any Democrat up for re-election in a Red State has to make a decision, fall on the sword and give up their political career for the good of DNC, or vote Kavanaugh.

Flake is a snake in the grass and always has been, everyone should have been suspicious of him when McCain is the one that brought Flake into politics and encouraged him to run for the second Republican seat in Arizona. I'm betting he leads everyone on that he's going to vote for Kavanaugh and then will vote against him, becoming the sweetheart of the left. He probably already has a multi million dollar job waiting on him working for the left, Netflix, Google or maybe even Facebook. Any other Republican that votes against Kavanaugh had better be job hunting.
#108534
I never said anything about "FAIR" did I, dimwit. So your idiotic comment is just another of your usual piles of made up stupid shit. Nothing more. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

And maybe you should stop melting down like this, namandgulfdumbfuck. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
#108539
Clownkicker wrote:I never said anything about "FAIR" did I, dimwit. So your idiotic comment is just another of your usual piles of made up stupid shit. Nothing more. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

And maybe you should stop melting down like this, namandgulfdumbfuck. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I remember a few weeks back you tried to insert the word "FAIR" and fucked it up so bad you barfed on your key board.. Im betting you dont remember our conversation that.. Again proving your were drunk again or was it yet.. And didnt have a fucking clue what your were even talking about... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
#108540
Another thing that Rachel Mitchell pointed out was that in her court alleged victims are not allowed to read from a prepared statement or to have attorneys sitting next to them to consult with. Only the person accused of the crime is permitted to have an attorney to consult with. Mitchell said during an investigation, you always want to hear what the person has to say in their own words, not read from a prepared statement that had been proofed or possibly written by her attorneys. Michell also thought it odd that Ford was caught off guard when asked who was paying for her attorneys and Ford said she didn't know, "Maybe me but I don't know for sure."
Big Beautiful Ballroom

Johnnie.... So it cost 400 MILLION DOLLARS […]

I hear the jury found the guy not guilty. Apparent[…]

Is there a bigger cuck piece of shit?

Green Energy

You Clean energy guys shot yourself in the foot, w[…]

Secret Slut

When I was dating my wife I discovered she had an […]

Red state gun murder rate....

So that's when Sparkles was recruited as a traitor[…]

Farewell Tour

Superb thread. When the history of the early days[…]

Exposing wife in phoenix

Any interested voyeurs. We are looking to expose[…]