Merged Kavanaugh/Ford OpinionComment threads for Oct 1

[Weatherman2020]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Like her memory on fear of flying? One month after flying across country to see family she suddenly becomes terrified to fly again.

She’s a mental health case nut

 

[LordBrownTrout]

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Like her memory on fear of flying? One month after flying across country to see family she suddenly becomes terrified to fly again.

She’s a mental health case nut

And then there's that little jewel where she requested to not face the person she was accusing. That's normally a big giveaway of lying on her part. She has a PhD in psychology....she should know that.

 

[jc456]

How is that possible? This is not even coming from me but from a trained prosecutor. How do you not remember who drove you to and from a party at a time with no cell phones? LOL.

As I remember those times way back before cell phones, we teenagers would generally hang out at one of our hangouts and wait for someone with a car to offer us a ride.

yep, and you should know who they were if you use it in an accusation. She should have had this all ready to go.

Says who?

says me. I am allowed right? my first amendment rights offer me that opportunity right?

Absolutely, but no one has to take you seriously.

as I don't ms. ford.

 

[jc456]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

I agree, she does not need to turn over any documents, however that hurts her credibility as it goes to her mental state and how she arrived at the allegations brought forth against Kavanaugh.

The Republicans need to let go of Kavanaugh and Trump needs to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge. Kavanaugh needs to sue Ford for slander in the state of Maryland where the alleged sexual abuse occurred.

The Senate Judiciary Committee needs to launch a federal investigation into the leaking of the documents that Ford asked to be taken in confidentiality, the Senate then needs to decide what actions to take against those that leaked the information.

Then she can decide whether to release her medical records in her defense.

the republicans only need to take a vote.

 

[jc456]

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Like her memory on fear of flying? One month after flying across country to see family she suddenly becomes terrified to fly again.

She’s a mental health case nut

perhaps she forgot she flew around in the pacific rim.

 

[easyt65]

For the record, Rachel Mitchell is a GOP political operative - who the hell cares what she believes to be weaknesses?

For the OFFICIAL Record and the TRUTH, none of which YOU give a damn about by giving this BS claim, Mitchell is an EXPERT Sex Crimes Prosecutor with years of experience who was brought in for her expertise but also to deny partisan Trump/GOP-hating trolls like you the opportunity to claim the GOP was disrespectful / hated women / blah, blah, blah....

She grilled BOTH Ford and Kavanaugh, taking heat at times because she grilled Kavanaugh with questions as if he were on trial for Ford's attack, which in a way he was. She asked tough questions to get ot the truth, and in the end she declared she would not try to take Kavanaugh to court with ZERO EVIDENCE, which is what the Democrats and Ford had to present against Kavanaugh at the hearing.

She grilled Kav? BS - She was silenced after Graham's outburst - The BOYS took over!

Again with the lies and BS! YES, she grilled Kavanaugh. AFTER her time was up is when Graham spoke ... DID YOU EVENWATCH THE HEARING, because based on this comment it seems you are just 'vomiting' what was fed to you.,

 

[DrLove]

For the record, Rachel Mitchell is a GOP political operative - who the hell cares what she believes to be weaknesses?

For the OFFICIAL Record and the TRUTH, none of which YOU give a damn about by giving this BS claim, Mitchell is an EXPERT Sex Crimes Prosecutor with years of experience who was brought in for her expertise but also to deny partisan Trump/GOP-hating trolls like you the opportunity to claim the GOP was disrespectful / hated women / blah, blah, blah....

She grilled BOTH Ford and Kavanaugh, taking heat at times because she grilled Kavanaugh with questions as if he were on trial for Ford's attack, which in a way he was. She asked tough questions to get ot the truth, and in the end she declared she would not try to take Kavanaugh to court with ZERO EVIDENCE, which is what the Democrats and Ford had to present against Kavanaugh at the hearing.

She grilled Kav? BS - She was silenced after Graham's outburst - The BOYS took over!

Again with the lies and BS! YES, she grilled Kavanaugh. AFTER her time was up is when Graham spoke ... DID YOU EVENWATCH THE HEARING, because based on this comment it seems you are just 'vomiting' what was fed to you.,

Your memory is failing Trumptard - Maybe try some of that new miracle brain food from Alex Jones? She lasted through the first part of the hearing featuring Ford, but was quickly relegated to the sidelines once Brett Kavanaugh started testifying, never to be heard from again.

Senate Republicans late Thursday ditched their hired prosecutor and took over the direct questioning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at a hearing to air decades old allegations about a sexual assault.

After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning, Republicans appeared to drop her.

Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee of Utah excoriated Democrats for their lines of questioning, which included delving into Kavanaugh’s drinking and high school yearbook entries.​

Republicans ditch female prosecutor, take over questioning Kavanaugh

Just in case ya need more:
Rachel Mitchell Goes to Washington – and It Doesn't Go Well

 

[easyt65]

Your memory is failing Trumptard - Maybe try some of that new miracle brain food from Alex Jones? She lasted through the first part of the hearing featuring Ford, but was quickly relegated to the sidelines once Brett Kavanaugh started testifying, never to be heard from again.

Senate Republicans late Thursday ditched their hired prosecutor and took over the direct questioning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at a hearing to air decades old allegations about a sexual assault.

After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning, Republicans appeared to drop her.

Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee of Utah excoriated Democrats for their lines of questioning, which included delving into Kavanaugh’s drinking and high school yearbook entries.​

Republicans ditch female prosecutor, take over questioning Kavanaugh

Just in case ya need more:
Rachel Mitchell Goes to Washington – and It Doesn't Go Well

THANK YOU FOR PROVING WHAT I SAID WAS CORRECT, SNOWFLAKE!

While you questioned whether Mitchell had asked any questions of Kavanaugh I said Mitchell questioned both Ford and Kavanaugh. I did not say, as you try so hard to make it sound, that the GOP did not ask questions.

From your own post above:

• "After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning,..."

You just proved what I said to be true. Thank you for that.

Now please continue your desperate spin to try to make it sound like either of us said something we did not.

Bwuhahahaha.....

 

[DrLove]

Your memory is failing Trumptard - Maybe try some of that new miracle brain food from Alex Jones? She lasted through the first part of the hearing featuring Ford, but was quickly relegated to the sidelines once Brett Kavanaugh started testifying, never to be heard from again.

Senate Republicans late Thursday ditched their hired prosecutor and took over the direct questioning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at a hearing to air decades old allegations about a sexual assault.

After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning, Republicans appeared to drop her.

Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee of Utah excoriated Democrats for their lines of questioning, which included delving into Kavanaugh’s drinking and high school yearbook entries.​

Republicans ditch female prosecutor, take over questioning Kavanaugh

Just in case ya need more:
Rachel Mitchell Goes to Washington – and It Doesn't Go Well

THANK YOU FOR PROVING WHAT I SAID WAS CORRECT, SNOWFLAKE!

While you questioned whether Mitchell had asked any questions of Kavanaugh I said Mitchell questioned both Ford and Kavanaugh. I did not say, as you try so hard to make it sound, that the GOP did not ask questions.

From your own post above:

• "After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning,..."

You just proved what I said to be true. Thank you for that.

Now please continue your desperate spin to try to make it sound like either of us said something we did not.

Bwuhahahaha.....

She Grilled Kavanaugh is a LIE and you know it. She got in about 5 minutes of niceties before The Boys Club took over.
Bwuhahahaha indeed!

 

[easyt65]

She Grilled Kavanaugh is a LIE and you know it.

No, I don't ... especially since you just proved me right.

Thank you again for that.

 

[jc456]

Your memory is failing Trumptard - Maybe try some of that new miracle brain food from Alex Jones? She lasted through the first part of the hearing featuring Ford, but was quickly relegated to the sidelines once Brett Kavanaugh started testifying, never to be heard from again.

Senate Republicans late Thursday ditched their hired prosecutor and took over the direct questioning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at a hearing to air decades old allegations about a sexual assault.

After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning, Republicans appeared to drop her.

Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee of Utah excoriated Democrats for their lines of questioning, which included delving into Kavanaugh’s drinking and high school yearbook entries.​

Republicans ditch female prosecutor, take over questioning Kavanaugh

Just in case ya need more:
Rachel Mitchell Goes to Washington – and It Doesn't Go Well

THANK YOU FOR PROVING WHAT I SAID WAS CORRECT, SNOWFLAKE!

While you questioned whether Mitchell had asked any questions of Kavanaugh I said Mitchell questioned both Ford and Kavanaugh. I did not say, as you try so hard to make it sound, that the GOP did not ask questions.

From your own post above:

• "After relying on Rachel Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor, for a couple of rounds of questioning,..."

You just proved what I said to be true. Thank you for that.

Now please continue your desperate spin to try to make it sound like either of us said something we did not.

Bwuhahahaha.....

She Grilled Kavanaugh is a LIE and you know it. She got in about 5 minutes of niceties before The Boys Club took over.
Bwuhahahaha indeed!

she got as much time as each senator. hmmmmmmm.

 

[toobfreak]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

YEP. If she has a history of fantasy sex accusations of others 19 times before and was treated for it for years, yeah---- that's kind of important and relevant. I laugh as people claim that is "private" information while wanting to look into Kavanaugh's toe jam. They don't need to have her medical/psychiatric records though, merely a medical expert to review them then answer questions based on their understanding whether Chrissy is a loony-bird or what.

 

[Papageorgio]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

I agree, she does not need to turn over any documents, however that hurts her credibility as it goes to her mental state and how she arrived at the allegations brought forth against Kavanaugh.

The Republicans need to let go of Kavanaugh and Trump needs to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge. Kavanaugh needs to sue Ford for slander in the state of Maryland where the alleged sexual abuse occurred.

The Senate Judiciary Committee needs to launch a federal investigation into the leaking of the documents that Ford asked to be taken in confidentiality, the Senate then needs to decide what actions to take against those that leaked the information.

Then she can decide whether to release her medical records in her defense.

the republicans only need to take a vote.

The don't have the votes, Collins and Murkowski are no's that leaves them one short of confirmation.

 

[jc456]

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

I agree, she does not need to turn over any documents, however that hurts her credibility as it goes to her mental state and how she arrived at the allegations brought forth against Kavanaugh.

The Republicans need to let go of Kavanaugh and Trump needs to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge. Kavanaugh needs to sue Ford for slander in the state of Maryland where the alleged sexual abuse occurred.

The Senate Judiciary Committee needs to launch a federal investigation into the leaking of the documents that Ford asked to be taken in confidentiality, the Senate then needs to decide what actions to take against those that leaked the information.

Then she can decide whether to release her medical records in her defense.

the republicans only need to take a vote.

The don't have the votes, Collins and Murkowski are no's that leaves them one short of confirmation.

well then they're short. I wouldn't give Collins or Murkowski any more GOP money. fk them

 

[The Original Tree]

Who didn't expect this?

They are now demanding changes to the conditions set down and were in agreement to allowing a supplemental investigation in to the unsubstantiated, vague, last minute and IMO totally false allegations.

As if you didn't expect them to pull this stunt once you gave them an inch.

DELAY

DELAY

DELAY

Now they want MORE TIME!

And they DEMAND an ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION for PERJURY, NOT on Whackadoodle Ford, but on Kavanaugh.

Quit letting The Left hold Democracy Hostage, and quit paying their Ransom!

I mean don't dare Investigate Feinstein, Katz, or Ford to see if ANY....ANY AT ALL of their statements were true of false. NOPE....The DEMS only want to turn over every rock, log and stone...to see if Kavanaugh, and Kavanaugh ONLY made any misstatement.

Same playbook with The Mueller Investigation Investigating Russian Collusion but making The Actual Collusion and Money Laundering through COIE Lawfirm through Fusion GPS to Russia for The Fake Dossier used to file False Affidavits to Illegally Spy on a Rival Presidential Campaign and his family and his advisors, IMMUNE from said "so called" Investigation.

And of course, they Declared just like when Trump was elected, to try to IMPEACH Kavanaugh the second he is confirmed.

The DEMONAZI Storm Troopers are on their incessant march to Tyranny, with every inch given, they take a mile.

We should NEVER NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS.

Dems accused of moving goalposts on Kavanaugh after FBI probe ordered

 

[toobfreak]

once you gave them an inch.

That's why you never give the Dems an inch. Fuck 'em all. The hearings had been set for a date and when Feinstein came up at the last minute with this Ford woman, they should have simply said: HARD CHEESE Diane: You sat on this for months and now have missed the deadline.

The ploy has been OBVIOUS from the start.

AS PREDICTED, any investigation not done with UNLIMITED time, scope, money, and reach will be lambasted by the Left as TAINTED. Because such an investigation, not only totally unneeded and uncalled for, would take FOREVER and undoubtedly turn up NEW people with NEW allegations, then all of THOSE would need investigated with unlimited time, scope, money and reach until ultimately, the goal is reached of finding SOMETHING no matter how removed from Ford and damaging Kavanaugh to the point publicly that the SJC is shamed into rejecting his nomination based solely on PUBLIC APPEARANCE-- -- -- that the democrats manufactured.

The funny thing is that everyone knows this new probe is a waste of time, because the FBI cannot force someone unwilling to talk to talk to them and cannot prove/disprove or vet every story thrown at them about beer, parties and women from 36+ years ago by every Ford supporter or Kav hater they come across!

Since Brett has denied the attacks, all the potential witnesses and leads gone nowhere and Ford shown us absolutely no corroboration of her story whatsoever, this FBI investigation is both pointless, futile, and will lead to ONE BIG ZILCH.

And the SJC will have to eventually get off its big fat ass, tell the democrats to STFU and vote on this guy based on his known qualifications and evidence. And we all know the evidence shows him supremely qualified. So then, all the democrats will vote NO against him anyway.

And now all future SC nominations to be dragged down into the gutter of liberal social media and baseless character assassination along with everything else in this country and the Left can celebrate the SC as being now made totally politicized as well. The best candidates will shrink from such a public assassination which will leave only those with high political motives even willing to go through the nomination process.

EITHER WAY: if having failed to utterly destroy Kavanaugh, stop his confirmation, they will then carry it into the election cycle denouncing the Republican party as woman haters who put politics over people's lives.

So much for that grand ideal of McCain's where it was the job of the PRESIDENT to pick his nominations and the job of the Senate to do what it could to confirm them so that the will of the people be heard that the Left so highly touted at his funeral just a few weeks ago! Hey John! Still glad you invited all those buddy democratic "friends" to your funeral?????

 

[iceberg]

they got a week, that's all they get. unless the FBI themselves come back saying they need more time based on what they find, no.

 

[HenryBHough]

Out last civil cost us around 620,000 American lives and that was with a fairly clear physical dividing line and fought mostly with rifles. I have to believe one fought today would create so much bloodshed that the only winners would be the arms manufacturers.

True but all liberals fail to consider the upside - THEIR own upside.

Fewer Americans means:

1. Fewer consumers, reducing your perceived threat of "Global-What-The-Fuck).

2. A weaker America - fewer to oppose implementation of the dictatorship your (once) New Messiah so hungered for.

Consider your own agenda and you'll see the logic in the need for a civil war. But if you realize you can't win a war of the shooting variety....yeah, that could explain why you won't want it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Needless to say she thinks Ford is quite full of it.

 

[Ecocertifmrl]

No written article. Videos are easier to post in social media - in other words, a "republican" "expert".