Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

[Flash]

LOL! Her husband, really?

Friends who said she may have mentioned it before.

Nobody that was there. The lying Moon Bat bitch.

Is that all the filthy ass TDS afflicted Moon Bats have?

What do you expect at this point? A DNA test? Pictures? Do most guys sexually assault women in public where there are a bunch of people witnessing it? Of course not. If you were accusing someone of something that DID happen but no one witnessed it but you and the accused, how would YOU prove it, except to present your story and the friends/family that you talked to about it? All this "prove it" stuff is ridiculous.

So proof is no longer necessary?

I ask again, what proof would you require?

Something more than a TDS afflicted Libtard saying that it happen.

 

[easyt65]

Ford has bragged about fucking 54 men while she was in HS.

Her choice TO screw 54 guys in HS has no bearing in this case. The fact that Kavanaugh was the only one she would not screw - according to her - was her choice. 'No' means 'No'...even if only to that 1 out of 55.

 

[Lewdog]

He lied about Miranda. He said he had nothing to do with the guy, and later it was found he very much had something to do with him.

He lied about Miranda. He said he had nothing to do with the guy,

He said he had nothing to do with it? Zero? Link?

Yes... in his last confirmation hearing.

Show me.

Here is a link about some of the lies he was caught in.

Five times Brett Kavanaugh appears to have lied to Congress while under oath

Then here is information about emails that weren't previously released that spell out that the information Kavanaugh got from Miranda spelled out how the information was stolen.

"Back then the senators did not have the emails that they have now, showing that Miranda sent Kavanaugh numerous documents containing what was plainly research by Democrats. Some of those emails went so far as to warn Kavanaugh not to distribute the Democratic talking points he was being given. If these were documents shared from the Democratic side of the aisle as part of normal business, as Kavanaugh claimed to have believed in his most recent testimony, why would they be labeled “not [for] distribution”? And why would we share our precise strategy to fight controversial Republican nominations with the Republicans we were fighting?

Another email chain included the subject line “spying.” It’s hard to imagine a more definitive clue than that. Another said “Senator Leahy’s staff has distributed a confidential letter to Dem Counsel” and then described for Kavanaugh that precise confidential information we had gathered about a nominee Kavanaugh was boosting. Again, it is illogical to think that we would have just given Miranda this “confidential” information for him to use against us. But this is precisely what Judge Kavanaugh suggested in his testimony on Wednesday. He is not that naïve.

In the hearing this week, Sen. Leahy also noted that the previously hidden emails showed that Miranda asked to meet Kavanaugh in person to give him “paper” files with “useful info to map out [Sens. Joe] Biden and [Dianne] Feinstein, and others.” The promised information included “Biden-speak.” Again, this would not have been a normal information exchange."

I Wrote Some of the Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About. He Should Be Impeached, Not Elevated.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen. You decide.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen.

Stolen? Miranda broke into Dem offices?
Hacked Dem computers? How did he steal information?

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research. It is very tiring the number of Trump supporters that get on this forum and discuss topics without having even read more than one source or even watched things like the confirmation hearings.

At this point all that will happen is I'll go get a source and you'll attack the source and not the information.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Sigh (From Daily Wire)

#1) All four people who can "corroborate" her claims were told in the years after her 2012 therapy sessions where she never used Kavanaugh's name about the alleged incident from over 35 years ago.

#2) One of the people listed is her husband, the other three are close friends of hers.

#3) Ford still does not remember where the party happened and is not certain of what year it took place, although she thinks it was most likely 1982, a year that Kavanaugh has calendars from, which casts further doubt on her memory.

#4) Ford told no one at the time what she claims happened, which means she has no contemporaneous witnesses to back up her story.

#5) According to her therapist's notes, Ford told her therapist in 2012 that there were four boys in the room. Now she claims there were only two boys in the room and claims that there were three boys at the party and one girl. She also never told the therapist Kavanaugh's name.

#6) The fact that her memory appears to have changed this much in only a few years is significant — but not as significant as the fact that all four people who Ford claims were at the party have all denied any recollection of attending the party described by Ford.

#7) Her own immediate family doesn’t appear to be backing her up, either," Sperry writes. "Her mother, father and two siblings are all conspicuously absent from a letter of support released by a dozen relatives, mostly on her husband’s side of the family."

#8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a Supreme Court pick," Sperry writes. "But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later."


If we move away from party lines and look at the aforementioned facts we will see that this story has more holes than swiss cheese.

 

[MarcATL]

ford will not show up tomorrow.

Wishful thinking, huh J?

 

[Flash]

How come Kavanaught had 65 women signing their support the day of or one day after the allegation?

That tells me the Republicans knew of it beforehand.

Also too, many of those originally signed supporting women have recanted their support.

Kavanaught stinks like poo!

LOL!

The women signed the letter because they have respect for Kavanaugh. Meanwhile the filthy Democrats are playing the butt hurt card because their bitch didn't win in 2016.

It is despicable dishonesty and it is undermining our Republic. Democrats are the scum of America.

 

[easyt65]

THE DEEP STATE LAWYERS HELP FORD REMEMBER / PREP FOR THURSDAY'S HEARING....

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

ford will not show up tomorrow.

Wishful thinking, huh J?

In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a Supreme Court pick," Sperry writes. "But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later."

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

ford will not show up tomorrow.

Wishful thinking, huh J?

Do you enjoy embarrassing yourself on these boards? Just admit you are taking her side because of party lines. Not because you believe her.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He lied about Miranda. He said he had nothing to do with the guy,

He said he had nothing to do with it? Zero? Link?

Yes... in his last confirmation hearing.

Show me.

Here is a link about some of the lies he was caught in.

Five times Brett Kavanaugh appears to have lied to Congress while under oath

Then here is information about emails that weren't previously released that spell out that the information Kavanaugh got from Miranda spelled out how the information was stolen.

"Back then the senators did not have the emails that they have now, showing that Miranda sent Kavanaugh numerous documents containing what was plainly research by Democrats. Some of those emails went so far as to warn Kavanaugh not to distribute the Democratic talking points he was being given. If these were documents shared from the Democratic side of the aisle as part of normal business, as Kavanaugh claimed to have believed in his most recent testimony, why would they be labeled “not [for] distribution”? And why would we share our precise strategy to fight controversial Republican nominations with the Republicans we were fighting?

Another email chain included the subject line “spying.” It’s hard to imagine a more definitive clue than that. Another said “Senator Leahy’s staff has distributed a confidential letter to Dem Counsel” and then described for Kavanaugh that precise confidential information we had gathered about a nominee Kavanaugh was boosting. Again, it is illogical to think that we would have just given Miranda this “confidential” information for him to use against us. But this is precisely what Judge Kavanaugh suggested in his testimony on Wednesday. He is not that naïve.

In the hearing this week, Sen. Leahy also noted that the previously hidden emails showed that Miranda asked to meet Kavanaugh in person to give him “paper” files with “useful info to map out [Sens. Joe] Biden and [Dianne] Feinstein, and others.” The promised information included “Biden-speak.” Again, this would not have been a normal information exchange."

I Wrote Some of the Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About. He Should Be Impeached, Not Elevated.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen. You decide.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen.

Stolen? Miranda broke into Dem offices?
Hacked Dem computers? How did he steal information?

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research. It is very tiring the number of Trump supporters that get on this forum and discuss topics without having even read more than one source or even watched things like the confirmation hearings.

At this point all that will happen is I'll go get a source and you'll attack the source and not the information.

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research.

You won't tell me how he stole the info?
You're making me sad.

 

[easyt65]

Ford will show up tomorrow. Her new Deep State Lawyers have helped her work on her memory and have prepped her for the hearing.....

 

[MarcATL]

I don't. I let evidence drive my decision on guilt. Franken was a stupid fk. I would never have resigned. Never. See I'm consistent. you can't because you're a fking leftist and that isn't a normal objective for you. No evidence, no listen to you. I don't care the party.

I gave my evidence.

You just don't like it.

Again, my evidence was the fact that Kavanaught lied to Congress.

Anyone who can do that, is rotten and corrupt to the core and cannot, under any circumstance, be trusted.

NEXT!!!!

 

[OldLady]

LOL! Her husband, really?

Friends who said she may have mentioned it before.

Nobody that was there. The lying Moon Bat bitch.

Is that all the filthy ass TDS afflicted Moon Bats have?

What do you expect at this point? A DNA test? Pictures? Do most guys sexually assault women in public where there are a bunch of people witnessing it? Of course not. If you were accusing someone of something that DID happen but no one witnessed it but you and the accused, how would YOU prove it, except to present your story and the friends/family that you talked to about it? All this "prove it" stuff is ridiculous.

Proving it is ridiculous? What if I were to say that you were the biggest slut east of the Mississippi and had banged more men than the Navy's Atlantic fleet! Wouldn't you want me to prove it, or is simply saying it is enough that it must be true, simply because I said it was true?

What if I said that it must be true, because I told every member of this message board, and they will swear that I told them that?

Have you lost every bit of morals you have ever had? I feel sorry for you libtards. No one should have to lower their standards so much to support an ideology.

Slow down, Admiral. I'm NOT supporting an ideology; I have my doubts that her depiction of events is accurate, but I see no reason to believe she is deliberately lying. I am not going to make any further judgments on it until I've heard her and Kavanaugh. I wish I also had the outcome of an investigation to help me make a decision, but I don't.

I understand your argument, but sadly it goes BOTH ways. This is going to be a he said/she said piece of reality of tv tomorrow and probably it won't help much at all. I'm guessing unless there is a surprise confession by someone that I will never know for sure.
As for that, since if this happened, he was a drunk teenager, I'm not sure it should matter.
Now stuff it with your lecture on morals.

 

[dannyboys]

ford will not show up tomorrow.

Wishful thinking, huh J?

Are you having any luck selling off all those 'Hands Up Don't Shoot' hoodies yet?
You are 100% of the time on the wrong side of the facts.

 

[Papageorgio]

Seems there are actually people who are able to testify that Kavanaugh did this.

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims
Steve Kiggins and Richard Wolf, USA TODAY Published 1:40 a.m. ET Sept. 26, 2018 | Updated 8:31 a.m. ET Sept. 26, 2018

The attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford have sworn and signed declarations from four people who corroborate her claims of sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

In documents sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee and obtained by USA TODAY, Ford’s attorneys present declarations from Ford’s husband, Russell, and three friends who support the California college professor’s accusation that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982.

The declarations will be used by Ford’s attorneys during a committee hearing on Thursday that could determine the fate of Kavanaugh’s embattled nomination. He also faces a second accusation of sexual assault from Deborah Ramirez, who claims Kavanaugh exposed himself and pushed his genitals into her face at a drunken party during the 1983-84 academic year at Yale University.

Kavanaugh has flatly denied all accusations, including during a national television interview on Fox News Monday night.

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

They weren't there, so I have no idea how they corroborate. The husband, to my understanding didn't know about it until 2012, so all he can say is she told me in 2012, that is hearsay at best. My question is why the four that she claimed were there not have any recollection of anything happening.

The whole issue is very cloudy and nothing is provable, this makes for a real puzzle.

 

[LaDexter]

One of the people listed is her husband

must be Anthony Weiner's twin brother...

 

[Lewdog]

Yes... in his last confirmation hearing.

Show me.

Here is a link about some of the lies he was caught in.

Five times Brett Kavanaugh appears to have lied to Congress while under oath

Then here is information about emails that weren't previously released that spell out that the information Kavanaugh got from Miranda spelled out how the information was stolen.

"Back then the senators did not have the emails that they have now, showing that Miranda sent Kavanaugh numerous documents containing what was plainly research by Democrats. Some of those emails went so far as to warn Kavanaugh not to distribute the Democratic talking points he was being given. If these were documents shared from the Democratic side of the aisle as part of normal business, as Kavanaugh claimed to have believed in his most recent testimony, why would they be labeled “not [for] distribution”? And why would we share our precise strategy to fight controversial Republican nominations with the Republicans we were fighting?

Another email chain included the subject line “spying.” It’s hard to imagine a more definitive clue than that. Another said “Senator Leahy’s staff has distributed a confidential letter to Dem Counsel” and then described for Kavanaugh that precise confidential information we had gathered about a nominee Kavanaugh was boosting. Again, it is illogical to think that we would have just given Miranda this “confidential” information for him to use against us. But this is precisely what Judge Kavanaugh suggested in his testimony on Wednesday. He is not that naïve.

In the hearing this week, Sen. Leahy also noted that the previously hidden emails showed that Miranda asked to meet Kavanaugh in person to give him “paper” files with “useful info to map out [Sens. Joe] Biden and [Dianne] Feinstein, and others.” The promised information included “Biden-speak.” Again, this would not have been a normal information exchange."

I Wrote Some of the Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About. He Should Be Impeached, Not Elevated.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen. You decide.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen.

Stolen? Miranda broke into Dem offices?
Hacked Dem computers? How did he steal information?

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research. It is very tiring the number of Trump supporters that get on this forum and discuss topics without having even read more than one source or even watched things like the confirmation hearings.

At this point all that will happen is I'll go get a source and you'll attack the source and not the information.

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research.

You won't tell me how he stole the info?
You're making me sad.

He hacked into them on a shared server, and then showed them to Republicans including Kavanaugh despite them being marked as Confidential and not for distribution.

I'm not going to provide a link to that, you can find your own that you will accept. I'm not going on a fishing trip just so you can attack the source and not the material.

There is email evidence between Miranda and Kavanaugh that proves he lied in his last confirmation hearing. A man that lies under oath should not be given a life-time appointment to the highest court in the land. He's lucky he's not been charged for lying. Bill Clinton got impeached for lying about cheating on his wife. How could a JUDGE instead basically get a promotion for also lying, but on a much more serious manner.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I don't. I let evidence drive my decision on guilt. Franken was a stupid fk. I would never have resigned. Never. See I'm consistent. you can't because you're a fking leftist and that isn't a normal objective for you. No evidence, no listen to you. I don't care the party.

I gave my evidence.

You just don't like it.

Again, my evidence was the fact that Kavanaught lied to Congress.

Anyone who can do that, is rotten and corrupt to the core.

NEXT!!!!

That is so stupid. So I am building a house and a nail breaks. Do I stop using nails going forward? Your logic is flawed. Not a surprise.

 

[jc456]

LOL! Her husband, really?

Friends who said she may have mentioned it before.

Nobody that was there. The lying Moon Bat bitch.

Is that all the filthy ass TDS afflicted Moon Bats have?

What do you expect at this point? A DNA test? Pictures? Do most guys sexually assault women in public where there are a bunch of people witnessing it? Of course not. If you were accusing someone of something that DID happen but no one witnessed it but you and the accused, how would YOU prove it, except to present your story and the friends/family that you talked to about it? All this "prove it" stuff is ridiculous.

So proof is no longer necessary?

I ask again, what proof would you require?

DNA evidence wouldn't be enough for them - They very simply don't care whether he did it or not.
This is about ramming something up the asses of progressives.
And it's going to backfire.

I'm a very fair person. I believe in the constitution and the rule of law. a person is innocent until proven guilty in my world. I see not in yours. and you say that about us? dude, too fking funny. Name one credible thing ford has released.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Show me.

Here is a link about some of the lies he was caught in.

Five times Brett Kavanaugh appears to have lied to Congress while under oath

Then here is information about emails that weren't previously released that spell out that the information Kavanaugh got from Miranda spelled out how the information was stolen.

"Back then the senators did not have the emails that they have now, showing that Miranda sent Kavanaugh numerous documents containing what was plainly research by Democrats. Some of those emails went so far as to warn Kavanaugh not to distribute the Democratic talking points he was being given. If these were documents shared from the Democratic side of the aisle as part of normal business, as Kavanaugh claimed to have believed in his most recent testimony, why would they be labeled “not [for] distribution”? And why would we share our precise strategy to fight controversial Republican nominations with the Republicans we were fighting?

Another email chain included the subject line “spying.” It’s hard to imagine a more definitive clue than that. Another said “Senator Leahy’s staff has distributed a confidential letter to Dem Counsel” and then described for Kavanaugh that precise confidential information we had gathered about a nominee Kavanaugh was boosting. Again, it is illogical to think that we would have just given Miranda this “confidential” information for him to use against us. But this is precisely what Judge Kavanaugh suggested in his testimony on Wednesday. He is not that naïve.

In the hearing this week, Sen. Leahy also noted that the previously hidden emails showed that Miranda asked to meet Kavanaugh in person to give him “paper” files with “useful info to map out [Sens. Joe] Biden and [Dianne] Feinstein, and others.” The promised information included “Biden-speak.” Again, this would not have been a normal information exchange."

I Wrote Some of the Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About. He Should Be Impeached, Not Elevated.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen. You decide.

So either Kavanaugh is lying, or he is too stupid to be on the Supreme Court because he couldn't figure out the information he was given was stolen.

Stolen? Miranda broke into Dem offices?
Hacked Dem computers? How did he steal information?

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research. It is very tiring the number of Trump supporters that get on this forum and discuss topics without having even read more than one source or even watched things like the confirmation hearings.

At this point all that will happen is I'll go get a source and you'll attack the source and not the information.

If you are asking this, then you haven't been paying attention and need to do some of your own research.

You won't tell me how he stole the info?
You're making me sad.

He hacked into them on a shared server, and then showed them to Republicans including Kavanaugh despite them being marked as Confidential and not for distribution.

I'm not going to provide a link to that, you can find your own that you will accept. I'm not going on a fishing trip just so you can attack the source and not the material.

There is email evidence between Miranda and Kavanaugh that proves he lied in his last confirmation hearing. A man that lies under oath should not be given a life-time appointment to the highest court in the land. He's lucky he's not been charged for lying. Bill Clinton got impeached for lying about cheating on his wife. How could a JUDGE instead basically get a promotion for also lying, but on a much more serious manner.

Lied about what?