So here's what I think happened between Kavanaugh & Ford

[Tilly]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

My two cents is that you are so busy trying to be seen as an independent and an independent thinker that you are willing to suspend logic, reason, and common sense.

Well, I'm either trying real hard, or I just naturally don't think like a partisan. You can run with whichever you'd like.
.

Do you really have to think like a partisan to accept there just isn’t any evidence to support her allegations, that her named witnesses have no recollection whatsoever of this event or anything like it, that the timing stinks to the high heavens, and that the nature of the allegations render the accused unable to even provide an alibi, let alone prove a negative?

I really don’t think you do.

The fact you are imagining other (fairly damning) scenarios looks like you are trying to lend her baseless accusations legitimacy, when nothing she has said has even been corroborated by anyone she names as witnesses.

I like and respect you a lot, Mac, but. I don’t think trying to pin ‘something’ on him in view of the above is fair or appears non partisan.

 

[bripat9643]

Don't need them, but no doubt they are on his calendar.

said meet at timmy's?

There ya go.

Now Ford has a place and time.

Just find timmy, and find out if Ford was there.​

I agree that's a clue as to the setting, and I believe in the video he gave Timmy's last name as well. If I'm the FBI that's on the top of my to-do list. There may be several leads to follow but that's in the forefront. Which is --- AGAIN --- the point of bringing up July 1st.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".
​

Seems to me Graham got fed up with the total bullshit coming from the left, and decided to read them the riot act.

the rest followed, making Mitchells questions irrevelant

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

You don't have an answer. Actually you do, and it's the same answer I have. You just can't admit to it.

Why did what happen when it did? We have no evidence that anything happened. All the designate witnesses say it didn't.

That's exactly why I supplied a video of the entire day's hearings, morning and afternoon. You can see everything that was said in the order it was said. The fact remains --- the questioning about July 1st was the last questioning Rachel Mitchell was permitted to do, The fact remains, the next round of Republican commentary (wasn't really questioning) came from Lindsey Graham, which was the first time all day that a Republican did not cede their time to Mitchell, who was never heard again, as Grassley had announced would be the format. That's all there in the video, at the time mark I gave, and it's all in order exactly as I have described it here. And it all takes place immediately after the exposure of the entry of July 1st.

There's nothing you can do about that, Fingerfuck. You can start spewing "moron" and "imbecile", as is your usual astute argument, you can throw your toys against the wall, you can drool on your shoes and point fingers à la Graham, you can sit and hold your breath until you turn purple, none of it's going to change that order of events. PERIOD.

And once AGAIN there are no "designate witnesses" --- or people of any kind outside the accusee himself --- who "said it didn't". None of them are QUALIFIED to say it didn't. That would require proving a negative, which is impossible. And guess the fuck what ----- there ain't nothing you can do about that either.

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

 

[Pogo]

I agree that's a clue as to the setting, and I believe in the video he gave Timmy's last name as well. If I'm the FBI that's on the top of my to-do list. There may be several leads to follow but that's in the forefront. Which is --- AGAIN --- the point of bringing up July 1st.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".
​

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

You don't have an answer. Actually you do, and it's the same answer I have. You just can't admit to it.

Why did what happen when it did? We have no evidence that anything happened. All the designate witnesses say it didn't.

That's exactly why I supplied a video of the entire day's hearings, morning and afternoon. You can see everything that was said in the order it was said. The fact remains --- the questioning about July 1st was the last questioning Rachel Mitchell was permitted to do, The fact remains, the next round of Republican commentary (wasn't really questioning) came from Lindsey Graham, which was the first time all day that a Republican did not cede their time to Mitchell, who was never heard again, as Grassley had announced would be the format. That's all there in the video, at the time mark I gave, and it's all in order exactly as I have described it here. And it all takes place immediately after the exposure of the entry of July 1st.

There's nothing you can do about that, Fingerfuck. You can start spewing "moron" and "imbecile", as is your usual astute argument, you can throw your toys against the wall, you can drool on your shoes and point fingers à la Graham, you can sit and hold your breath until you turn purple, none of it's going to change that order of events. PERIOD.

And once AGAIN there are no "designate witnesses" --- or people of any kind outside the accusee himself --- who "said it didn't". None of them are QUALIFIED to say it didn't. That would require proving a negative, which is impossible. And guess the fuck what ----- there ain't nothing you can do about that either.

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

 

[bripat9643]

Nothing you listed confirms anything other than the fact that he was a normal kid in high school.

I never tried to rape anyone in High School. You have an odd definition of normal.

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

So you were tagging along with him everywhere he went in those days were you Flingerfuck?

God DAMN you get around.

I wasn't tagging along with you either. Does that prove you raped someone?

You obviously lack the capacity to commit logic.

"Logic"?

Fingerboy posts the word "logic" after claiming a negative he can't prove and running away? "Logic"?

Your post said --- and it's still sitting right there above, and I quote, verbatim:

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

What part of "prove that" eludes your tiny little mind?

Plus there is the indisputable fact that all the witnesses Christina Ford named said she is lying. You can't get more certain of a man's innocence than that.

 

[bripat9643]

Why did what happen when it did? We have no evidence that anything happened. All the designate witnesses say it didn't.

That's exactly why I supplied a video of the entire day's hearings, morning and afternoon. You can see everything that was said in the order it was said. The fact remains --- the questioning about July 1st was the last questioning Rachel Mitchell was permitted to do, The fact remains, the next round of Republican commentary (wasn't really questioning) came from Lindsey Graham, which was the first time all day that a Republican did not cede their time to Mitchell, who was never heard again, as Grassley had announced would be the format. That's all there in the video, at the time mark I gave, and it's all in order exactly as I have described it here. And it all takes place immediately after the exposure of the entry of July 1st.

There's nothing you can do about that, Fingerfuck. You can start spewing "moron" and "imbecile", as is your usual astute argument, you can throw your toys against the wall, you can drool on your shoes and point fingers à la Graham, you can sit and hold your breath until you turn purple, none of it's going to change that order of events. PERIOD.

And once AGAIN there are no "designate witnesses" --- or people of any kind outside the accusee himself --- who "said it didn't". None of them are QUALIFIED to say it didn't. That would require proving a negative, which is impossible. And guess the fuck what ----- there ain't nothing you can do about that either.

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

 

[Pogo]

I never tried to rape anyone in High School. You have an odd definition of normal.

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

So you were tagging along with him everywhere he went in those days were you Flingerfuck?

God DAMN you get around.

I wasn't tagging along with you either. Does that prove you raped someone?

You obviously lack the capacity to commit logic.

"Logic"?

Fingerboy posts the word "logic" after claiming a negative he can't prove and running away? "Logic"?

Your post said --- and it's still sitting right there above, and I quote, verbatim:

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

What part of "prove that" eludes your tiny little mind?

Plus there is the indisputable fact that all the witnesses Christina Ford named said she is lying. You can't get more certain of a man's innocence than that.

You've been told this myriad times now Fingerboy ---- NOBODY said she is lying, nor CAN anybody say that. Not even Brett Kavanaugh says she's lying. And you've been challenged repeatedly to back this up and you ran away to hide every single time. And there you go again. BUH bye.

 

[bripat9643]

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

So you were tagging along with him everywhere he went in those days were you Flingerfuck?

God DAMN you get around.

I wasn't tagging along with you either. Does that prove you raped someone?

You obviously lack the capacity to commit logic.

"Logic"?

Fingerboy posts the word "logic" after claiming a negative he can't prove and running away? "Logic"?

Your post said --- and it's still sitting right there above, and I quote, verbatim:

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

What part of "prove that" eludes your tiny little mind?

Plus there is the indisputable fact that all the witnesses Christina Ford named said she is lying. You can't get more certain of a man's innocence than that.

You've been told this myriad times now Fingerboy ---- NOBODY said she is lying, nor CAN anybody say that. Not even Brett Kavanaugh says she's lying. And you've been challenged repeatedly to back this up and you ran away to hide every single time. And there you go again. BUH bye.

You're an idiot. When they said what she claimed never happened, they said she was lying. What do you imagine that means, that she's telling the truth?

No matter how much evidence is amassed that she's lying, morons like you will continue to maintain that she's "credible."

 

[Pogo]

That's exactly why I supplied a video of the entire day's hearings, morning and afternoon. You can see everything that was said in the order it was said. The fact remains --- the questioning about July 1st was the last questioning Rachel Mitchell was permitted to do, The fact remains, the next round of Republican commentary (wasn't really questioning) came from Lindsey Graham, which was the first time all day that a Republican did not cede their time to Mitchell, who was never heard again, as Grassley had announced would be the format. That's all there in the video, at the time mark I gave, and it's all in order exactly as I have described it here. And it all takes place immediately after the exposure of the entry of July 1st.

There's nothing you can do about that, Fingerfuck. You can start spewing "moron" and "imbecile", as is your usual astute argument, you can throw your toys against the wall, you can drool on your shoes and point fingers à la Graham, you can sit and hold your breath until you turn purple, none of it's going to change that order of events. PERIOD.

And once AGAIN there are no "designate witnesses" --- or people of any kind outside the accusee himself --- who "said it didn't". None of them are QUALIFIED to say it didn't. That would require proving a negative, which is impossible. And guess the fuck what ----- there ain't nothing you can do about that either.

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

You drew a comparison. One that actually works. We "know" she's lying to the same degree we "know" there is no Bigfoot. It's the same degree we "know" that a political party holds a convention on trolley tracks in December.

 

[bripat9643]

Because it IS funny.

You're basing your entire argument on a date likely picked at random, because it was mid-summer, and listed the names of several of his friends, Mitchell picked it, and the senators parroted it, thinking, like you, something actually happened that day.

Because Graham had had enough.

That seems pretty obvious.



Now, send all your investigative work to the FBI, tell them to locate timmy and the boys, and find out if Ford was there July 1st

(you could get a Gold Star, instead of a funny)

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

if the FBI gets in Timmy's old house and it has not been remodeled, or gets old pictures of it, and the layout matches her drawing, that is corroboration, the 3 men that she mentioned at the party, on the K calendar that summer day, is also corroboration, now that they have a date, they can try to get the member log ins for those who were at the country club pool that day, july 1st, 1982 and if she was there that would corroborate her story as well.....


they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

they can confirm whether he was a heavy drinker... what he was like when he drank?

there are many things that can end up corroborating her story...

They haven't got shit. "If, if, if." So far all we have is "lie, lie, lie." You're an imbecile.

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

You're the idiot who claims Ford is "credible" even though all the witnesses she named said she's lying. Is there any point in discussing this issue with you any further?

Is it possible for you to say anything that's actually true?

 

[Pogo]

So you were tagging along with him everywhere he went in those days were you Flingerfuck?

God DAMN you get around.

I wasn't tagging along with you either. Does that prove you raped someone?

You obviously lack the capacity to commit logic.

"Logic"?

Fingerboy posts the word "logic" after claiming a negative he can't prove and running away? "Logic"?

Your post said --- and it's still sitting right there above, and I quote, verbatim:

Kavanaugh never tried to rape anyone in high school, douchebag.

What part of "prove that" eludes your tiny little mind?

Plus there is the indisputable fact that all the witnesses Christina Ford named said she is lying. You can't get more certain of a man's innocence than that.

You've been told this myriad times now Fingerboy ---- NOBODY said she is lying, nor CAN anybody say that. Not even Brett Kavanaugh says she's lying. And you've been challenged repeatedly to back this up and you ran away to hide every single time. And there you go again. BUH bye.

You're an idiot. When they said what she claimed never happened, they said she was lying. What do you imagine that means, that she's telling the truth?

No matter how much evidence is amassed that she's lying, morons like you will continue to maintain that she's "credible."

And again ---- it simply does not get any simpler than this --- they did ***NOT*** say it ''never happened".

Go ahead. Try to prove me wrong. Use The Googles. Use anything you want as long as it's fucking real.

 

[bripat9643]

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

You drew a comparison. One that actually works. We "know" she's lying to the same degree we "know" there is no Bigfoot. It's the same degree we "know" that a political party holds a convention on trolley tracks in December.

I said we know it "just as surely as we know Bigfoot DOESN'T exist." Not that Bigfoot does exist, you fucking moron.

 

[Pogo]

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

if the FBI gets in Timmy's old house and it has not been remodeled, or gets old pictures of it, and the layout matches her drawing, that is corroboration, the 3 men that she mentioned at the party, on the K calendar that summer day, is also corroboration, now that they have a date, they can try to get the member log ins for those who were at the country club pool that day, july 1st, 1982 and if she was there that would corroborate her story as well.....


they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

they can confirm whether he was a heavy drinker... what he was like when he drank?

there are many things that can end up corroborating her story...

They haven't got shit. "If, if, if." So far all we have is "lie, lie, lie." You're an imbecile.

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

You're the idiot who claims Ford is "credible" even though all the witnesses she named said she's lying. Is there any point in discussing this issue with you any further?

Is it possible for you to say anything that's actually true?

I have not used the term "credible" and NO ONE in those involved, including Kavanaugh, including Rump, has said "she's lying". And you CANNOT prove otherwise because you pulled all this out of your ass.

That's not new. What's also not new is that you still haven't learned you don't get away with it.

 

[Pogo]

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

You drew a comparison. One that actually works. We "know" she's lying to the same degree we "know" there is no Bigfoot. It's the same degree we "know" that a political party holds a convention on trolley tracks in December.

I said we know it "just as surely as we know Bigfoot DOESN'T exist." Not that Bigfoot does exist, you fucking moron.

Correct. I read it right the first time.

This is sailing right over your pointed little hood isn't it.

 

[bripat9643]

What do you imagine you are proving?

What do you imagine you are accomplishing by claiming a negative you can't know, getting called on it, running away to hide, and then popping up to run the same play expecting different results?

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

You drew a comparison. One that actually works. We "know" she's lying to the same degree we "know" there is no Bigfoot. It's the same degree we "know" that a political party holds a convention on trolley tracks in December.

Do you imagine they are all suffering brain damage? Do you think they had a blackout about the event - all four of them? Ford admits she doesn't remember a host of crucial details about the event.

 

[bripat9643]

They haven't got shit. "If, if, if." So far all we have is "lie, lie, lie." You're an imbecile.

the ONLY one of the witnesses that LACKED CANDOR in that hearing, was Kavanaugh... on several occasions...

pick a better, conservative candidate that can fly thru, like Gorsuch.

Oh Puh-leeze. Yet more Ritual Defamation from a rote leftist.

The Degeneration of Belief: Compiled By Laird Wilcox

Oh Puh-leeze yourself, the poster is correct. Kavanaugh continuously dissembled, evaded questions, deflected onto "I got into Yale" and "I like beer" and clearly tried to eat up so much time on bullshit deflections having no relationship to the question posed that the questioner would run out of time. He also deliberately misstated the same thing I just busted (again) Fingerboy on --- the idea that "all these people say it never happened". They cannot say it never happened, nor did they.

You're the idiot who claims Ford is "credible" even though all the witnesses she named said she's lying. Is there any point in discussing this issue with you any further?

Is it possible for you to say anything that's actually true?

I have not used the term "credible" and NO ONE in those involved, including Kavanaugh, including Rump, has said "she's lying". And you CANNOT prove otherwise because you pulled all this out of your ass.

That's not new. What's also not new is that you still haven't learned you don't get away with it.

Politicians are never going to accuse the leftwing heroin of this fantasy of lying. That's politics, not what they really think. The witnesses she named said that it never happened. That's the exact equivalent of saying she's lying.

 

[bripat9643]

We do know it just as surely as we know Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Exactly. Took you all day to admit it but there it is.

So you believe Bigfoot exists? Is that really what you wanted to say?

Obviously, you lack the capacity to commit logic.

Our understanding of Bigfoot would be more relevant if all the so-called "evidence" was proven to be fake.

You drew a comparison. One that actually works. We "know" she's lying to the same degree we "know" there is no Bigfoot. It's the same degree we "know" that a political party holds a convention on trolley tracks in December.

I said we know it "just as surely as we know Bigfoot DOESN'T exist." Not that Bigfoot does exist, you fucking moron.

Correct. I read it right the first time.

This is sailing right over your pointed little hood isn't it.

You got it exactly backwards, you fucking retard. Do you actually speak and understand English? I see no evidence of it.

 

[bripat9643]

Maybe

But I think it was more than just a dry hump for fun

He tried to remove her clothes but she had a bathing suit on underneath and he gave up

Prove it, asshole.

AM I THE ONLY ONE who has noticed the ring around Chrissy's throat?

View attachment 219298

What is that?

1. Residual marks left from her B&D sex collar removed for the hearing?
2. Deliberately put there to subliminally make her appear more the "victim?"
3. Leftover choke marks from her husband after pleading with the psycho liberal bitch not to go through with this crap failed?

I want this to end up with Brett on the Supreme Court, Feinstein impeached and Chrissy Ford counter-sued for one million dollars.

You piece of Russian shit!!! Your entire post is shit you made up.

That picture of Dr. Ford is so photoshopped that even a blind person could see it.

Prove it.

 

[bripat9643]

Don't need them, but no doubt they are on his calendar.

said meet at timmy's?

There ya go.

Now Ford has a place and time.

Just find timmy, and find out if Ford was there.​

I agree that's a clue as to the setting, and I believe in the video he gave Timmy's last name as well. If I'm the FBI that's on the top of my to-do list. There may be several leads to follow but that's in the forefront. Which is --- AGAIN --- the point of bringing up July 1st.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".
​

Seems to me Graham got fed up with the total bullshit coming from the left, and decided to read them the riot act.

the rest followed, making Mitchells questions irrevelant

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

You don't have an answer. Actually you do, and it's the same answer I have. You just can't admit to it.

I keep explaining this to you and you keep clicking "funny".

Because it IS funny.

You're basing your entire argument on a date likely picked at random, because it was mid-summer, and listed the names of several of his friends, Mitchell picked it, and the senators parroted it, thinking, like you, something actually happened that day.

I just said that's what happened. The question I put to you is why it happened WHEN IT DID.

Because Graham had had enough.

That seems pretty obvious.



Now, send all your investigative work to the FBI, tell them to locate timmy and the boys, and find out if Ford was there July 1st

(you could get a Gold Star, instead of a funny)

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

if the FBI gets in Timmy's old house and it has not been remodeled, or gets old pictures of it, and the layout matches her drawing, that is corroboration, the 3 men that she mentioned at the party, on the K calendar that summer day, is also corroboration, now that they have a date, they can try to get the member log ins for those who were at the country club pool that day, july 1st, 1982 and if she was there that would corroborate her story as well.....


they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

they can confirm whether he was a heavy drinker... what he was like when he drank?

there are many things that can end up corroborating her story...

she drew a picture of the inside layout of the house, with description... small living room, stairway to go up to 2nd floor, bathroom at top of stairs and bedroom near it that she was thrown in to and locked in...

Exactly how did she get out if she was LOCKED IN? Every bedroom I've seen with locks, is locked from the inside.

Correct. Everyone was inside and while in there one of them locked it. Then when she got free from under Kavanaugh on the bed, she ----- STILL BEING ON THE INSIDE ---- would have had equal ability to UNlock it, and so escape.

This isn't complex. Really it isn't. When you lock a door from the inside, you also UNlock it from the inside. It's the same knob on the same side of the same door.

Would you like an illustration to understand how this works?

Holey SHIT.....

Really dood? Political partisan hackery has now devolved into pretending not to understand how a freaking DOORKNOB works?

they can check his calendar to see if he never put girls on his calendar, and only mentions of ''the guys''....

The Aug 7 entry proves he includes girls.

On his own calendar he does. But he does not predict, nor can he, nor could anybody, WHO ELSE might show up as the evening
goes on.

Again ---- NOT FUCKING ROCKET SURGERY.

You can put 30 friends together and rent a bus to go to Fenway Park. You can even get there with a "three hour drive" if your bus can go 140 miles an hour. And you can enter all that in your calendar. But you ***CANNOT*** list the names of thirty thousand other people who may be at Fenway Park the same day. Because that CANNOT BE PREDICTED.


---- what is it........ something in the water between Oklahoma and Texas? Or what? Is your water imported from Flint?

What are you trying to prove with your idiotic door knob rant?

 

[bripat9643]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

There is zero evidence that Kavanaugh interacted with Blasy at the party.
There is zero evidence that Kavanaugh was at the party
There is zero evidence that Blasy (Ford) was at the party
There is zero evidence that there was a party

Should we lynch a man on zero evidence? According to the Nazi democrats we should.

He threatens abortion and must be stopped by any means.

No one is lynching any one the guy is being vetted. Dumb fuck. When you are in the public eye allegations get made and you must defend. It has never been any different. So quit crying like your fucking baby judge! What a little bitch crying on national TV. He loses his man card over that alone.

No, it's a lynching.

You Nazis failed to derail him during the vetting and pulled up a magic last second "witness" who has been paid a million dollars, to magically derail what you failed to derail earlier.

It's a lynch mob and a disgrace. The fact that you pigs have done this has damaged the confirmation process beyond repair.

Bla bla bla. Keep supporting draft dodgers and people that cry on national TV and call your self a conservative. You like little bitches and birds of a feather flock together!

You mean people like this, asshole?

 

[Missourian]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

If anyone corroberated her story!

But they don't.

More likely piece of shit liberal Democrats found a left wing loonu liberal professor to lie through her teeth.