Mark Judge, Key Witness To Alleged Brett Kavanaugh Assault, Refuses To Testify

[eagle1462010]

Kavanaugh has no supporting witness, he is known to have perjured himself at least 5-Times.....typical lying Con.

Ford has no supporting witness. No supporting evidence, she has nothing to prove what she claims to have happened.

She PASSED a lie detector test

Thus the nominee has the right to take a polygraph, the FBI can provide him the opportunity.

Why would he? If he passed the test the left wouldn’t believe it and it was rigged. Polygraphs are proven to be unreliable on both detecting lies and detecting truth. Read up on them, and if I was innocent, I’d never take a lie detector test. Nothing positive can come out of it.

You're wrong, the polygraph is used by many LE Agencies as well as the Computer Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA).

Why wouldn't he? She did, he didn't? Common sense suggests he is hiding something.

He's already on the 2nd highest court in the country.........wait that many years to make allegations right before the vote........Anita times 2.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Uh, Judge says he was not there. So why would he testify?

He can testify under oath that he wasn't there.....short testimony.....wonder why that's not an option for him.

Well it doesn't look like Ford will be testifying monday. What does she got to hide?

Lies?

 

[Papageorgio]

Kavanaugh has no supporting witness, he is known to have perjured himself at least 5-Times.....typical lying Con.

Ford has no supporting witness. No supporting evidence, she has nothing to prove what she claims to have happened.

She PASSED a lie detector test

Thus the nominee has the right to take a polygraph, the FBI can provide him the opportunity.

Why would he? If he passed the test the left wouldn’t believe it and it was rigged. Polygraphs are proven to be unreliable on both detecting lies and detecting truth. Read up on them, and if I was innocent, I’d never take a lie detector test. Nothing positive can come out of it.

You're wrong, the polygraph is used by many LE Agencies as well as the Computer Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA).

Why wouldn't he? She did, he didn't? Common sense suggests he is hiding something.

It is based on memory, she could pass if in her mind she believed it happened.

There have been cases where innocent people have failed lie detector tests. Why would you take a test that could fail? Again if I was innocent there is no way I’d take the test knowing how they work.

 

[Tilly]

Judge was a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Georgetown Prep when Christine Blasey Ford says the incident occurred.

Mark Judge, the man who Christine Blasey Ford has said was in the room while Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her when they were in high school, has declined to speak before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Democrats had called for him to do so. But in a statement to committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Judge claimed he had no memory of the incident and declined to speak publicly about the allegation.

More: Mark Judge, Key Witness To Alleged Brett Kavanaugh Assault, Refuses To Testify

It's interesting that Judge has no memory of the incident. Well, Dr. Ford said there were also two more boys downstairs - so why doesn't someone investigate them and their memory of the gathering? Surely all of them aren't deaf and dumb.

Kavanaugh has no supporting witness, he is known to have perjured himself at least 5-Times.....typical lying Con.

Ford has no supporting witness. No supporting evidence, she has nothing to prove what she claims to have happened.

Though she discussed it with others including a therapist way back when...

‘Way back when’.......in 2012 .....about 30hrs after the alleged incident?
Lol.

That would be 30 YEARS after the alleged incident.

.

Yes, I meant to put years!

 

[gallantwarrior]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Ford has no supporting witness. No supporting evidence, she has nothing to prove what she claims to have happened.

She PASSED a lie detector test

Thus the nominee has the right to take a polygraph, the FBI can provide him the opportunity.

Why would he? If he passed the test the left wouldn’t believe it and it was rigged. Polygraphs are proven to be unreliable on both detecting lies and detecting truth. Read up on them, and if I was innocent, I’d never take a lie detector test. Nothing positive can come out of it.

You're wrong, the polygraph is used by many LE Agencies as well as the Computer Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA).

Why wouldn't he? She did, he didn't? Common sense suggests he is hiding something.

It is based on memory, she could pass if in her mind she believed it happened.

There have been cases where innocent people have failed lie detector tests. Why would you take a test that could fail? Again if I was innocent there is no way I’d take the test knowing how they work.

I guess it depends on how much she was paid whether she "clearly" recalls the incident. Ka-ching! Ka--ching!

 

[Lewdog]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

No one is indicted anyone of a crime. People are asking for it to be investigated... and it still wouldn't be charged as a crime because it is beyond the statute of limitations. You are blowing things out of proportion.

 

[gallantwarrior]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

No one is indicted anyone of a crime. People are asking for it to be investigated... and it still wouldn't be charged as a crime because it is beyond the statute of limitations. You are blowing things out of proportion.

Yet, it is expected by the leftardians that this allegation should delay confirmation of an otherwise extremely well-qualified candidate for the seat. That's the point, though, isn't it? Delay and hope that the left will take Congress at the midterms? That would leave the country safely stalled with no progress at all.

 

[Lewdog]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

No one is indicted anyone of a crime. People are asking for it to be investigated... and it still wouldn't be charged as a crime because it is beyond the statute of limitations. You are blowing things out of proportion.

Yet, it is expected by the leftardians that this allegation should delay confirmation of an otherwise extremely well-qualified candidate for the seat. That's the point, though, isn't it? Delay and hope that the left will take Congress at the midterms? That would leave the country safely stalled with no progress at all.

He's not as qualified as you think. You can watch the videos of this hearing and his last and catch him in obvious lies involving a guy that worked on the torture stuff. He also lied on his financial forms about excessive credit card debt.

 

[OKTexas]

Why can't the trump administration come up with a clean candidate? Kavanaugh should withdraw his nomination and another person chosen as nominee.

Remember that the female half of the U.S.A. is watching. We want a candidate who has no past in denigrating female persons, include candidates who are soaked up to their necks in misogynistic/patriarchal ideologies.

Now that's some funny shit. No woman will believe that Ford is credible when she can't say where or when this supposedly happened.

.

 

[francoHFW]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

Time's up

 

[OKTexas]

when was the last time you got drunk and sexually harassed a female?

You have to be careful asking questions like that. It's not really fair to accuse people on here of crimes like that. I understand what you mean, and that you aren't saying it in the way others have on here... that if a normal person gets drunk and sexually assaults or harasses a woman they remember it.

No worries, the idiot just trapped himself.

.

Nice rebuttal, in an earlier post I acknowledge getting drunk and remembered very little of that night. Blackouts are not an excuse and blackouts (in my singular experience) were not total.

I did not accuse the guy who called me an idiot of sexual harassment, my point was clear and it's not the first time he failed to comprehend the written word. When one reads with a bias, one reads what they want to believe.

I have no idea what that gibberish means, I am noting you haven't provided any details you verified in your preliminary investigation.

.

My "preliminary investigation"? Explain that.

I challenged you to investigate my getting drunk about 40 years ago and sexually harassing my now wife. I want you to tell the rest of the folks exactly where that happened and who witnessed it and exactly what I did, with just the information I provided. That's what this Ford woman is demanding of the FBI with pretty much the same information. Are you too feeble to be up to that task?

.

 

[Lewdog]

You have to be careful asking questions like that. It's not really fair to accuse people on here of crimes like that. I understand what you mean, and that you aren't saying it in the way others have on here... that if a normal person gets drunk and sexually assaults or harasses a woman they remember it.

No worries, the idiot just trapped himself.

.

Nice rebuttal, in an earlier post I acknowledge getting drunk and remembered very little of that night. Blackouts are not an excuse and blackouts (in my singular experience) were not total.

I did not accuse the guy who called me an idiot of sexual harassment, my point was clear and it's not the first time he failed to comprehend the written word. When one reads with a bias, one reads what they want to believe.

I have no idea what that gibberish means, I am noting you haven't provided any details you verified in your preliminary investigation.

.

My "preliminary investigation"? Explain that.

I challenged you to investigate my getting drunk about 40 years ago and sexually harassing my now wife. I want you to tell the rest of the folks exactly where that happened and who witnessed it and exactly what I did, with just the information I provided. That's what this Ford woman is demanding of the FBI with pretty much the same information. Are you too feeble to be up to that task?

.

Unfortunately due to exclusionary laws, your wife can't be forced to cooperate and testify against you.

 

[BluesLegend]

Breaking: A man who doesn't remember something that didn't happen, isn't testifying. Dem's butthurt.

 

[francoHFW]

You have to be careful asking questions like that. It's not really fair to accuse people on here of crimes like that. I understand what you mean, and that you aren't saying it in the way others have on here... that if a normal person gets drunk and sexually assaults or harasses a woman they remember it.

No worries, the idiot just trapped himself.

.

Nice rebuttal, in an earlier post I acknowledge getting drunk and remembered very little of that night. Blackouts are not an excuse and blackouts (in my singular experience) were not total.

I did not accuse the guy who called me an idiot of sexual harassment, my point was clear and it's not the first time he failed to comprehend the written word. When one reads with a bias, one reads what they want to believe.

I have no idea what that gibberish means, I am noting you haven't provided any details you verified in your preliminary investigation.

.

My "preliminary investigation"? Explain that.

I challenged you to investigate my getting drunk about 40 years ago and sexually harassing my now wife. I want you to tell the rest of the folks exactly where that happened and who witnessed it and exactly what I did, with just the information I provided. That's what this Ford woman is demanding of the FBI with pretty much the same information. Are you too feeble to be up to that task?

.

So you tried to rape your wife?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

W

Judge was a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Georgetown Prep when Christine Blasey Ford says the incident occurred.

Mark Judge, the man who Christine Blasey Ford has said was in the room while Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her when they were in high school, has declined to speak before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Democrats had called for him to do so. But in a statement to committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Judge claimed he had no memory of the incident and declined to speak publicly about the allegation.

More: Mark Judge, Key Witness To Alleged Brett Kavanaugh Assault, Refuses To Testify

It's interesting that Judge has no memory of the incident. Well, Dr. Ford said there were also two more boys downstairs - so why doesn't someone investigate them and their memory of the gathering? Surely all of them aren't deaf and dumb.

Okay, who are the other two boys?

 

[francoHFW]

So, we've come to the point where no evidence is required to indict someone accused of a crime? As long as some be-atch can claim some dude "sexually" did, regardless of the statute of limitations, the guy is GUILTY,GUILTY,GUILTY!!!!! Hang that guy, cut off his dick and balls, and make damned sure he'll never get hired for a job again...ever...
C'mon, where's our constitutionally guaranteed prosecution under the law? Guess that's out the window if connected to President Trump.

Time's up

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...AxAB&usg=AOvVaw0TfwpR3sJ9x1eB0iu3XyZK&ampcf=1
Told her therapist 6 years ago, was ruined for years. Times up sexist a****** GOP s*** heads.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Ford has no supporting witness. No supporting evidence, she has nothing to prove what she claims to have happened.

She PASSED a lie detector test

Thus the nominee has the right to take a polygraph, the FBI can provide him the opportunity.

Why would he? If he passed the test the left wouldn’t believe it and it was rigged. Polygraphs are proven to be unreliable on both detecting lies and detecting truth. Read up on them, and if I was innocent, I’d never take a lie detector test. Nothing positive can come out of it.

You're wrong, the polygraph is used by many LE Agencies as well as the Computer Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA).

Why wouldn't he? She did, he didn't? Common sense suggests he is hiding something.

He's already on the 2nd highest court in the country.........wait that many years to make allegations right before the vote........Anita times 2.

Metoo movement has changed the landscape.

 

[BluesLegend]

She PASSED a lie detector test

Thus the nominee has the right to take a polygraph, the FBI can provide him the opportunity.

Why would he? If he passed the test the left wouldn’t believe it and it was rigged. Polygraphs are proven to be unreliable on both detecting lies and detecting truth. Read up on them, and if I was innocent, I’d never take a lie detector test. Nothing positive can come out of it.

You're wrong, the polygraph is used by many LE Agencies as well as the Computer Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA).

Why wouldn't he? She did, he didn't? Common sense suggests he is hiding something.

He's already on the 2nd highest court in the country.........wait that many years to make allegations right before the vote........Anita times 2.

Metoo movement has changed the landscape.

Still waiting for you people to explain why Feinstein sat on this for 2 months, got nothing to say? Thought so.

 

[OKTexas]

No worries, the idiot just trapped himself.

.

Nice rebuttal, in an earlier post I acknowledge getting drunk and remembered very little of that night. Blackouts are not an excuse and blackouts (in my singular experience) were not total.

I did not accuse the guy who called me an idiot of sexual harassment, my point was clear and it's not the first time he failed to comprehend the written word. When one reads with a bias, one reads what they want to believe.

I have no idea what that gibberish means, I am noting you haven't provided any details you verified in your preliminary investigation.

.

My "preliminary investigation"? Explain that.

I challenged you to investigate my getting drunk about 40 years ago and sexually harassing my now wife. I want you to tell the rest of the folks exactly where that happened and who witnessed it and exactly what I did, with just the information I provided. That's what this Ford woman is demanding of the FBI with pretty much the same information. Are you too feeble to be up to that task?

.

Unfortunately due to exclusionary laws, your wife can't be forced to cooperate and testify against you.

No such law for witnesses. You want to take up the task?

.