(09-27-2018 01:16 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:13 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:01 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:47 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Character assassination is an attempt to tarnish a person's reputation. It may involve exaggeration, misleading half-truths, or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. It is a form of defamation and can be a form of ad hominem argument.

let them vote. there is a reason that there is a vote.

if he is confirmed and the accusations are true, then remove him

if the accusations are false let the accusers be punished.

how stupid are people? seriously?

Why vote until these women have been heard & their stories discussed? What’s the rush? Isn’t that what we were told in 2015?

and there you have it.

If “we have an election in less than a year” is a valid reason to hold off on a vote, surely we can agree that something potentially criminal is worth checking out to prior to voting.

Why have no charges been filed?

(09-27-2018 02:38 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:13 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:05 AM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  If it is your son, you should know you son and his behavior. It is that simple. You gave him the ethics and morals or you did not, unless the kid is a sociopath. So assuming, and reasonably so, you have done your job as a parent, how do your deal with **** allegations of abuse that have no collaboration? Do you play the "let's see" game or do you defend the honor of your child that, apparently, unfortunately, was born with a *****?

In the attempt to stay on topic, your daughter has made an accusation against someone. Do you call it **** without waiting to see how the story plays out? I wouldn’t, just like I would wait to hear both sides before blindly defending any actions on my son’s part. Isn’t that what repubs lament these days? The “my kid would NEVER do that” defense?

Stop trotting out this same tired left wing talking points over and over. They ARE being heard and people HAVE listened to them from the start. You can't sit back and act otherwise because of a few comments on some message board.

Unless new facts suddenly emerge tomorrow the accusations lack substance and credibility and they in no way should derail the nomination.

Not if you believe the talking points the entirety of the left is spouting. From day one the committee has tried to accommodate this woman, far more than I would have.

(09-27-2018 06:48 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:02 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 11:52 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 11:41 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 10:56 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Yes I remember women reporting it against Bill Clinton. Dragged through the mud by our vaunted mainstream press. And of course Hillary too. If I was a woman I'd think twice about reporting.

As I said multiple times in this thread, I’d hope we’d would learn from past politicians/SC candidates’ behavior & listen to them before making judgement calls. If it were your daughter making these reports, I’d bet you’d think twice before dismissing them.

If it was your son being accused I bet you wouldn't be so quick to believe someone that admits they were drunk. Didn't know who's house. Didn't know how many people were there. Didn't know the month. Didn't know the year.

Why is it only daughters are so special we have to believe them? Especially when they name 3 people that supposedly saw this and none of the three remember it?

If it were my son I would expect him not to be a party to people who did these things, whether or not he was an active participant. If he were drunk and/or involved with these people when they did these things, he’s part of the problem.

yeah and if this was my daughter, I would expect her to stop going to the parties after the first time... instead of going 9 more times.

nympho's gonna nymph.

(09-27-2018 08:45 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:07 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:35 AM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  And my ultimate point is the left claims to be oh so in touch with those they claim to serve, yet the reality of their upbringing and lives indicate a greater degree of segregation than us common folk experience. Prove me wrong, Hugo Chavez.

You’re speaking to a kid raised in the hood in North Memphis, whose parents stayed there to pay for a private education at an affluent East Memphis school that had kids from all parts of the county, and from there my circle involved kids from public & private schools across the entire city, but yeah, I’m not common folk. OK. Whatever.

BS BS BS. In 1985 there was no part of North Memphis that could be considered the hood. Frayser was still ok then, hell, Raleigh was a desirable area then. Unless you lived near Chelsea and Hollywood you did not live in the hood. Hell, even nutbush then was ok.

Spot on.

(09-27-2018 01:05 AM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  If it is your son, you should know you son and his behavior. It is that simple. You gave him the ethics and morals or you did not, unless the kid is a sociopath. So assuming, and reasonably so, you have done your job as a parent, how do your deal with **** allegations of abuse that have no collaboration? Do you play the "let's see" game or do you defend the honor of your child that, apparently, unfortunately, was born with a *****?

My parents would tanned my hide if I hang out with Judge, Kavanaugh, etc. Especially using those slang words describing the females in the Yearbook. The Yearbook entry for Kavanaugh tells you that he was a devilish kid that disrespected females. The entries in the Yearbook can be profiled by law enforcement agencies that of a sexual predator. Not just him, but Mark Judge and the other boys at the time. These rich kids that have gone to private schools think they are privileged. The ones that do the things that Kavanaugh and Judge have been accused of think they can get away with these things. It is mostly the boys on the sports teams. Remember the Steubenville, Ohio High School football players were a couple of them got found guilty of raping? If Judge and Kavanaugh uploaded their video of their conquests online? The Republicans will still vote Kavanaugh into the SC. I am sorry. Kavanaugh and Judge are guilty of rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder. I saw a lot of Republican voters on a Conservative website just pull this guy and nominate another. They also believe that Kavanaugh also done these things. Only the very few minority of supporters is like 1% of this country. Even Fox News Poll shows that Ford is more believable than Kavanaugh. Even Republican voters are pushing back against sexual predators which was why Roy Moore was defeated in Alabama. Once you put a sexual predator on the bench, it is for life. That includes more accusations coming out after he gets voted in. Kavanaugh is tarnished, and should be pull.

(09-27-2018 10:18 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 01:05 AM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  If it is your son, you should know you son and his behavior. It is that simple. You gave him the ethics and morals or you did not, unless the kid is a sociopath. So assuming, and reasonably so, you have done your job as a parent, how do your deal with **** allegations of abuse that have no collaboration? Do you play the "let's see" game or do you defend the honor of your child that, apparently, unfortunately, was born with a *****?

My parents would tanned my hide if I hang out with Judge, Kavanaugh, etc. Especially using those slang words describing the females in the Yearbook. The Yearbook entry for Kavanaugh tells you that he was a devilish kid that disrespected females. The entries in the Yearbook can be profiled by law enforcement agencies that of a sexual predator. Not just him, but Mark Judge and the other boys at the time. These rich kids that have gone to private schools think they are privileged. The ones that do the things that Kavanaugh and Judge have been accused of think they can get away with these things. It is mostly the boys on the sports teams. Remember the Steubenville, Ohio High School football players were a couple of them got found guilty of raping? If Judge and Kavanaugh uploaded their video of their conquests online? The Republicans will still vote Kavanaugh into the SC. I am sorry. Kavanaugh and Judge are guilty of rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder. I saw a lot of Republican voters on a Conservative website just pull this guy and nominate another. They also believe that Kavanaugh also done these things. Only the very few minority of supporters is like 1% of this country. Even Fox News Poll shows that Ford is more believable than Kavanaugh. Even Republican voters are pushing back against sexual predators which was why Roy Moore was defeated in Alabama. Once you put a sexual predator on the bench, it is for life. That includes more accusations coming out after he gets voted in. Kavanaugh is tarnished, and should be pull.

So you're giving us fact instead of conjecture I suppose?

My parents would've tanned my hide if I hung out with people with horrible grammar, but here I are...

(09-27-2018 12:50 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:36 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:29 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:26 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:17 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  I’m saying they need to not be automatically discredited as some on here would prefer. I’ve never said that the accusers are 100% right & Kavanaugh is 100% wrong. Take a breath.

Who's dismissing it just because it's a female? I haven't seen that. What I seen is Mrs Ford give conflicting stories. Stories that she cant remember facts to but the facts she seems to recall.....naming 3 people that was supposedly there. Well not one of them backs her up.

Now I think that goes way past simply dismissing because she's a she or someone's daughter.

You still never answered my question. For the 3rd time, if this was your son and knowing the facts we know. Would you be so willing to trust Mrs. Fords facts as she remembers them?

So take a deep breath and look at the facts Mrs Ford has stated (or the ones she's been quoted as saying) and tell me again why Kavanaugh isn't getting the same benefit that you want others to give to Mrs Ford and the gang rape lady?

Those on this thread referring to an accused as a “drunk beetch” are indeed trying to dismiss it.

“drunk beetch” or anything like that wasn't in the post you directed your post to. The post that I quoted.
https://csnbbs.com/thread-859070-post-15...id15534270

So for the 4th time I will ask if this was your son and knowing the facts we know. Would you be so willing to trust Mrs. Fords facts as she remembers them? Or the things said by the repeatedly gang rape girl?

A simple yes or no is all that's needed...why is that so hard for you?

Since it's your question, maybe you should go first.

If it was your daughter, your wife, sister etc making the accusations, would you believe her...?

You have derailed this thread by making it personal. If it were anyone's daughter or son, he or she would recuse themselves from the committee. lol

Anyway, Elizabeth Rasor ( Ex GF of Mark Judge during his so named 'Wasted' period ) has agreed to testify. That might be interesting.

First off you are mistaken it wasn't me that made the statement of "if it was your daughter". So no I didn't make it personal all I did was ask if it was her son.

To answer you question I dont just "believe a family member because they are a female". It looks like the family of Mrs Ford is doing the same because not one statement is from her family. Well other than a husband.

I would go over the facts with them and if I thought they were mistaken or flat out lying I would direct them to stay quiet. Especially since they did for 30+ years. It might get me a divorce, or make my daughter, or sister pissed off. But as a father, husband, brother... my job is PROTECTION

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:23 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Swetnick's statement sounds like it was written by a ambulance chasing lawyer.
[i]She became aware that Judge and Kavanaugh were spiking the punch at parties. (How did she become aware of this did she witness, did he tell her if not then her statement is hearsay.)
She was gang raped at one of these parties where Kavanaugh was present. (Was Kavanaugh one of the rapists, if not his presence does not make him guilty of anything).
She attended at least 10 of these parties in 1981 - 82 where gang rapes occurred with Judge and Kavanaugh present witnessing Kavanaugh in line outside the door at least one time. (Did she actually see him enter the room and assault the girl, if not there's no evidence he did anything.)[/i
Her statement allows her to paint Kavanaugh in a bad light without actually saying she witnessed him do anything illegal so her statement can be 100% true and still provide NO Proof Kavanaugh did anything illegal.

But of course. That's all these statements are designed to do. And they are very cleverly crafted. This is why I would be fine with an FBI investigation, provided it were limited in scope and time. We don't need another Mueller witch hunt.

I think this is all a case of democrats being willing to lie, cheat, steal, do anything to keep someone who would vote to repeal RvW off the court. I think the women are lying, and I think a proper investigation would expose them fairly quickly. The way it is being done now, tried in the court of public opinion with statements from lawyers, not from parties, is guaranteed to be problematic. So make the women testify, under oath, before the FBI, and see what happens to their stories. And press them about the parts of their stories that make no sense.

You had to take extra time to drive because you are terrified of flying, and yet you fly to Hawaii frequently? How does that work? You are in academia, you need to attend conferences all over, how do you do that without flying? Just for starters, that part of the story makes no sense. And if you'll lie about that, what won't you lie about?

BTW to you notice the polygraph Ford took was done in Maryland, wonder if she driver from CA to MD for that?

You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

(09-27-2018 12:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:23 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Swetnick's statement sounds like it was written by a ambulance chasing lawyer.
[i]She became aware that Judge and Kavanaugh were spiking the punch at parties. (How did she become aware of this did she witness, did he tell her if not then her statement is hearsay.)
She was gang raped at one of these parties where Kavanaugh was present. (Was Kavanaugh one of the rapists, if not his presence does not make him guilty of anything).
She attended at least 10 of these parties in 1981 - 82 where gang rapes occurred with Judge and Kavanaugh present witnessing Kavanaugh in line outside the door at least one time. (Did she actually see him enter the room and assault the girl, if not there's no evidence he did anything.)[/i
Her statement allows her to paint Kavanaugh in a bad light without actually saying she witnessed him do anything illegal so her statement can be 100% true and still provide NO Proof Kavanaugh did anything illegal.

But of course. That's all these statements are designed to do. And they are very cleverly crafted. This is why I would be fine with an FBI investigation, provided it were limited in scope and time. We don't need another Mueller witch hunt.

I think this is all a case of democrats being willing to lie, cheat, steal, do anything to keep someone who would vote to repeal RvW off the court. I think the women are lying, and I think a proper investigation would expose them fairly quickly. The way it is being done now, tried in the court of public opinion with statements from lawyers, not from parties, is guaranteed to be problematic. So make the women testify, under oath, before the FBI, and see what happens to their stories. And press them about the parts of their stories that make no sense.

You had to take extra time to drive because you are terrified of flying, and yet you fly to Hawaii frequently? How does that work? You are in academia, you need to attend conferences all over, how do you do that without flying? Just for starters, that part of the story makes no sense. And if you'll lie about that, what won't you lie about?

BTW to you notice the polygraph Ford took was done in Maryland, wonder if she driver from CA to MD for that?

You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

Yet she cannot recall exactly when she took the polygraph, the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral. Also she does not know who paid for it. She likes to quote how the brain works but her's farts when its convenient for her.

She says she has a fear of flying and did not want to come out to give testimony, yet she has no problem flying for vacations, as far as way as Hawaii.

(09-27-2018 12:53 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But of course. That's all these statements are designed to do. And they are very cleverly crafted. This is why I would be fine with an FBI investigation, provided it were limited in scope and time. We don't need another Mueller witch hunt.

I think this is all a case of democrats being willing to lie, cheat, steal, do anything to keep someone who would vote to repeal RvW off the court. I think the women are lying, and I think a proper investigation would expose them fairly quickly. The way it is being done now, tried in the court of public opinion with statements from lawyers, not from parties, is guaranteed to be problematic. So make the women testify, under oath, before the FBI, and see what happens to their stories. And press them about the parts of their stories that make no sense.

You had to take extra time to drive because you are terrified of flying, and yet you fly to Hawaii frequently? How does that work? You are in academia, you need to attend conferences all over, how do you do that without flying? Just for starters, that part of the story makes no sense. And if you'll lie about that, what won't you lie about?

BTW to you notice the polygraph Ford took was done in Maryland, wonder if she driver from CA to MD for that?

You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

Yet she cannot recall exactly when she took the polygraph, the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral. Also she does not know who paid for it. She likes to quote how the brain works but her's farts when its convenient for her.

She says she has a fear of flying and did not want to come out to give testimony, yet she has no problem flying for vacations, as far as way as Hawaii.

To be clear about my comment, how reliable can a polygraph be when given to someone on the day of a funeral of a loved one?

(09-27-2018 06:08 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:53 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  BTW to you notice the polygraph Ford took was done in Maryland, wonder if she driver from CA to MD for that?

You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

Yet she cannot recall exactly when she took the polygraph, the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral. Also she does not know who paid for it. She likes to quote how the brain works but her's farts when its convenient for her.

She says she has a fear of flying and did not want to come out to give testimony, yet she has no problem flying for vacations, as far as way as Hawaii.

To be clear about my comment, how reliable can a polygraph be when given to someone on the day of a funeral of a loved one?

Not very. Would be interested to know if the guy who gave her the polygraph knew about the death of her grandma.

AAAAAnd this is what we thought it would be.

(09-27-2018 06:08 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:53 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  BTW to you notice the polygraph Ford took was done in Maryland, wonder if she driver from CA to MD for that?

You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

Yet she cannot recall exactly when she took the polygraph, the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral. Also she does not know who paid for it. She likes to quote how the brain works but her's farts when its convenient for her.

She says she has a fear of flying and did not want to come out to give testimony, yet she has no problem flying for vacations, as far as way as Hawaii.

To be clear about my comment, how reliable can a polygraph be when given to someone on the day of a funeral of a loved one?

Doesn't matter. She was only asked two questions and they were both about the same thing. So she either lied on both questions or told the truth as there was no baseline questioning to determine results on obvious correct answers.

(09-27-2018 08:12 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 06:08 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:53 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 12:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 04:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  You would think the Democrats could find a crooked polygraph operator in California.

Seriously. Why would she do it in Maryland?

Because she was attending her grandma's funeral..... that's right she got a polygraph administered to her ON THE DAY OF HER GRANDMA'S FUNERAL... Let that sink in for a moment.

Yet she cannot recall exactly when she took the polygraph, the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral. Also she does not know who paid for it. She likes to quote how the brain works but her's farts when its convenient for her.

She says she has a fear of flying and did not want to come out to give testimony, yet she has no problem flying for vacations, as far as way as Hawaii.

To be clear about my comment, how reliable can a polygraph be when given to someone on the day of a funeral of a loved one?

Doesn't matter. She was only asked two questions and they were both about the same thing. So she either lied on both questions or told the truth as there was no baseline questioning to determine results on obvious correct answers.

She was asked on The Box if the hand written statement she scrawled on that legal pad was true.

Look at that thing. It has so many markouts and additions and notations, I cant even comprehend what it says. "Is it true?" well.. before or after the corrections.

Looking back it is obvious to me she is delusional. This just came into her mind when she saw he was nominated and might have thought him and the judge guy were cute or something but could never talk to them. That's why no one she included in her delusion has any knowledge of it including her best friend. And she has absolutely no clue how she got there wherever there is. Also she had a wet bathing suit on under her clothes. To me that is the most bizarre thing. Did she not have a bag that she put her bathing suit in after getting out of the pool? Wouldn't be surprised if it comes out later she is being treated for depression or some other psychiatric condition.

Is this a case of Slander and/or libel?

(09-27-2018 08:28 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Is this a case of Slander and/or libel?

Too foggy. Plus bad optics. Avenetti & Svetnick, yes. Ramirez, yes.

(09-27-2018 08:28 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Is this a case of Slander and/or libel?

Libel is written, slander is spoken (not that you didnt know, just a way to remember)

both are defamation

As an expert in (consensual) gangbangs, I can testify with confidence that Judge Kavanaugh does not fit the mold of a frequent participant.

I'll be sending this sworn statement to my local representative, Mr. Richard Blumenthal, D-CT.

(09-27-2018 10:50 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  As an expert in (consensual) gangbangs, I can testify with confidence that Judge Kavanaugh does not fit the mold of a frequent participant.

I'll be sending this sworn statement to my local representative, Mr. Richard Blumenthal, D-CT.

Please tell him for me that he is a douche. My senators are both for him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk