Kavanaugh sexual misconduct in High School

[porkbutt 861]

Who's the ugly troll sitting behind him? Gross.

it's like bring the biggest freak you know to work day for the dems. the thing behind feinstein is horrifying

[Bill E. 666]

Probably mentioned in the last 50 pages but the one that has me going and I wish they had asked her about it was her good friend. So a guy tries to rape you at a party that you and a friend were at. You get out but never tell your good friend to stay away from these guys because they attacked you? At least she could have warned her friend that they were bad news.

[Mr. Hand 482]

Booker just said this was a moral moment....so much hypocrisy.

[RLLD 3,455]

Pretending that simply being accused is enough to not move forward is immoral.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

Booker just said this was a moral moment....so much hypocrisy.

this is the same guy that wrote about and bragged about groping a woman when he was young, correct?

[iam90sbaby 2,124]

Corey Booker might be the biggest douche to ever take a breathe.

[IMMensaMind 459]

+1

 

She is credible and I personally believe she is telling the truth. The person that has the most to gain by lying is Kavanaugh. The democrats don't give a fock about who is lying or telling the truth though. They're butt hurt over the republicans stealing Obama's nomination (which they did), and trying to do anything to stall this until after mid-terms, where they hope to have a majority and can get a more moderate judge pushed through.

She is not credible, but that doesn't mean that she's not 'telling the truth'. I believe this woman has been abused - and not just once, and not just sexually. More on that in a minute.

 

A George Constanza line comes to mind: "it's not a lie if you believe it". I think that captures this dizzy broad's persona. Asserting that YOU believe Kavanaugh "has the most to gain by lying" is a false dilemma you arrange to try to add credibility to your position. Clearly, the political stakes are enormous on both sides, and - as such - the GOP would have required stringent background checks on their applicant to be willing to risk putting up a nominee in such a politically charged climate.

 

Likewise, the Dems have ON RECORD said that they will do "everything possible" to #resist - and this is evidence that they've been following through on their promise. Just the complex ties this woman has to various big Dem players intimately involved in this scene should raise suspicion - and it does...to those open to the consideration.

 

But what really clinched it for me is a laundry list of inconsistencies. In no particular order, and taking into consideration the reality that many of the abused do not report abuse, what matters here is the nature of how THIS allegation came to light, and the circumstances subsequent::

 

- she chose to make her allegation political, INSTEAD of making it about justice. To this day, no charges have been filed in order for Maryland authorities - the proper jurisdiction - to look into the claims. There is no statute of limitations on a charge leveled of sexual impropriety, if the specifics of the claim are severe enough. The FBI has no jurisdiction, and the FBI has repeatedly explained it. The only reason that the FBI had purview in Hill/Thomas incident is because it took place on federal property, between federal employees.

 

- she still refuses to share her therapy notes

 

- the nature of the polygraph: questions asked/details have not been disclosed; have been intentionally manipulated with a narrative that begs an appeal to authority which doesn't exist.

 

- she named people she believed would corroborate her claims. None of them did; the best any of them (one of them) did is say "they believe her".

 

- her side/her have been caught lying. When Grassley/Graham offered to go to HER to get her testimony, she didn't appear to even KNOW that the offer was made. That means that she was heavily 'handled', and not at ALL in control. They claimed she was in California at the time, events revealed subsequently demonstrated that she was actually in Delaware, and fully able to make the time frame that was initially offered. She claimed that she was afraid of flying, yet she was flying all over the country before and during this circus.

 

- she was handled even in the hearing; bracketed by two supposedly pro-bono attorneys - one of which had an envelope (one of two in her hands) by Sheila Jackson-Lee. Pro-bono?

 

- Her own mannerisms belied the fabrications layered on top of vague truths. She pivoted immediately from little-girl/weepy voice during her read testimony to bright/sunny "I got my coffee" voice in literally 5 seconds. That indicates intentionally contrived emotion. In addition, she looked like a spastic pigeon when arriving in the hearing room; rapid/quick head movements indicate intent to lie. As does protecting vulnerable parts of her body - in her case, her neck - while testifying. She pressed her chin into her neck and lowered her head, looking up each and every time she touched upon the claim that it was Kavanaugh who assaulted her: a clear physical cue belying honesty. https://www.businessinsider.com/11-signs-someone-is-lying-2014-4

 

- She swung from use of complex terms and words to claiming she didn't understand even the simplest words and terms. This too was manipulative nonsense.

 

- her social media/HS history was scrubbed from the 'net before she was put before the public.

 

We cannot allow legally unenforceable claims to disqualify someone, and ruin their lives. If we do, we have put 'beliefs' ahead of the presumption of innocence.

 

And that is the end of civility and rule of law.

 

The Democrats have been rebuffed by the American public. Make no mistake: if the US believed that Kavanaugh was a serial rapist, he wouldn't be getting this confirmation.

 

The American public has concluded that Blasey-Ford is ill/confused - but is manifesting a Constanza - and they are also likewise suspicious that the Dems orchestrated the use of this woman as a means to an end; to #resist in every way they possibly could to take down Kavanaugh.

 

They've failed, and they've used every ounce of their political capital in the process. They are going to be crushed in November.

[Mr. Hand 482]

this is the same guy that wrote about and bragged about groping a woman when he was young, correct?

Yep

[IMMensaMind 459]

Two more points which undermine the credibility of her story:

 

1. She claims she ran into Mark Judge shortly after this incident, and came right up to him and said hi (that is my understanding; correct if you have a different impression). Which abuse victim does that? That is not logical.

 

2. She claims she left her girlfriend in a house - alone - with drunken men who just assaulted her. You can counter that she was out of sorts, etc, but she didn't have even a subsequent CONVERSATION with her in the hours, days and weeks following, and her FRIEND likewise didn't ask her where she went, as her friend not only has no recollection of the party at all, but Blasey-Ford herself cannot conjure any conversation subsequent which would reconcile a friend legitimately wondering where the only other girl in the house during this very small party with very big allegations went.

 

Illogical.

 

I also believe that it is entirely possible that the abuse which has resulted in this woman being the current wreck that she so clearly is took place in her childhood. Grown women with squeaky little girl voice with the mannerisms this woman has screams 'daddy issues'.

 

I think this woman has serious daddy issues, and - while she may have been abused in her childhood, or during school by non-family - these dysfunctions have resulted in huge Impressionism and the ability to project onto any object an accusation of this gravity.

 

She's mentally ill IMO.

[iam90sbaby 2,124]

She is not credible, but that doesn't mean that she's not 'telling the truth'. I believe this woman has been abused - and not just once, and not just sexually. More on that in a minute.

 

A George Constanza line comes to mind: "it's not a lie if you believe it". I think that captures this dizzy broad's persona. Asserting that YOU believe Kavanaugh "has the most to gain by lying" is a false dilemma you arrange to try to add credibility to your position. Clearly, the political stakes are enormous on both sides, and - as such - the GOP would have required stringent background checks on their applicant to be willing to risk putting up a nominee in such a politically charged climate.

 

Likewise, the Dems have ON RECORD said that they will do "everything possible" to #resist - and this is evidence that they've been following through on their promise. Just the complex ties this woman has to various big Dem players intimately involved in this scene should raise suspicion - and it does...to those open to the consideration.

 

But what really clinched it for me is a laundry list of inconsistencies. In no particular order, and taking into consideration the reality that many of the abused do not report abuse, what matters here is the nature of how THIS allegation came to light, and the circumstances subsequent::

 

- she chose to make her allegation political, INSTEAD of making it about justice. To this day, no charges have been filed in order for Maryland authorities - the proper jurisdiction - to look into the claims. There is no statute of limitations on a charge leveled of sexual impropriety, if the specifics of the claim are severe enough. The FBI has no jurisdiction, and the FBI has repeatedly explained it. The only reason that the FBI had purview in Hill/Thomas incident is because it took place on federal property, between federal employees.

 

- she still refuses to share her therapy notes

 

- the nature of the polygraph: questions asked/details have not been disclosed; have been intentionally manipulated with a narrative that begs an appeal to authority which doesn't exist.

 

- she named people she believed would corroborate her claims. None of them did; the best any of them (one of them) did is say "they believe her".

 

- her side/her have been caught lying. When Grassley/Graham offered to go to HER to get her testimony, she didn't appear to even KNOW that the offer was made. That means that she was heavily 'handled', and not at ALL in control. They claimed she was in California at the time, events revealed subsequently demonstrated that she was actually in Delaware, and fully able to make the time frame that was initially offered. She claimed that she was afraid of flying, yet she was flying all over the country before and during this circus.

 

- she was handled even in the hearing; bracketed by two supposedly pro-bono attorneys - one of which had an envelope (one of two in her hands) by Sheila Jackson-Lee. Pro-bono?

 

- Her own mannerisms belied the fabrications layered on top of vague truths. She pivoted immediately from little-girl/weepy voice during her read testimony to bright/sunny "I got my coffee" voice in literally 5 seconds. That indicates intentionally contrived emotion. In addition, she looked like a spastic pigeon when arriving in the hearing room; rapid/quick head movements indicate intent to lie. As does protecting vulnerable parts of her body - in her case, her neck - while testifying. She pressed her chin into her neck and lowered her head, looking up each and every time she touched upon the claim that it was Kavanaugh who assaulted her: a clear physical cue belying honesty. https://www.businessinsider.com/11-signs-someone-is-lying-2014-4

 

- She swung from use of complex terms and words to claiming she didn't understand even the simplest words and terms. This too was manipulative nonsense.

 

- her social media/HS history was scrubbed from the 'net before she was put before the public.

 

We cannot allow legally unenforceable claims to disqualify someone, and ruin their lives. If we do, we have put 'beliefs' ahead of the presumption of innocence.

 

And that is the end of civility and rule of law.

 

The Democrats have been rebuffed by the American public. Make no mistake: if the US believed that Kavanaugh was a serial rapist, he wouldn't be getting this confirmation.

 

The American public has concluded that Blasey-Ford is ill/confused - but is manifesting a Constanta - and they are also likewise suspicious that the Dems orchestrated the use of this woman as a means to an end; to #resist in every way they possibly could to take down Kavanaugh.

 

They've failed, and they've used every ounce of their political capital in the process. They are going to be crushed in November.

 

Excellent post.

[Mr. Hand 482]

Two more points which undermine the credibility of her story:

 

1. She claims she ran into Mark Judge shortly after this incident, and came right up to him and said hi (that is my understanding; correct if you have a different impression). Which abuse victim does that? That is not logical.

 

2. She claims she left her girlfriend in a house - alone - with drunken men who just assaulted her. You can counter that she was out of sorts, etc, but she didn't have even a subsequent CONVERSATION with her in the hours, days and weeks following, and her FRIEND likewise didn't ask her where she went, as her friend not only has no recollection of the party at all, but Blasey-Ford herself cannot conjure any conversation subsequent which would reconcile a friend legitimately wondering where the only other girl in the house during this very small party with very big allegations went.

 

Illogical.

As far as #2....she also doesn't remember how she got home. She didn't have a drivers license so who at that party drove her home?

[RLLD 3,455]

Blumenthal is impressing me right now....

[posty 2,296]

Corey Booker might be the biggest douche to ever take a breathe.

*breath

[IMMensaMind 459]

Blumenthal is impressing me right now....

Nothing about that greasy creep is impressive. He, and other Dems, realize that they've lost and have spent every ounce of public credibility they had in the process.

 

At this point, they're all trying to walk the very fine line between salvaging reputations by sounding reasonable, while also not appearing to completely backtrack on their prior personas.

[iam90sbaby 2,124]

*breath

 

Don't be that guy.

[Mr. Hand 482]

The more I think about it why wasn't this question asked or pushed to Ford. She claimed that there was 3 boys and one other girl at that party. She said she left the house after the alleged event took place. Yet, none of the people there have stated that party ever happened. Who drove her home? It was either her girlfriend who claims she wasn't there or that PJ Smythe guy who also claims he wasn't there.

[mobb_deep 917]

She is not credible, but that doesn't mean that she's not 'telling the truth'. I believe this woman has been abused - and not just once, and not just sexually. More on that in a minute.

 

A George Constanza line comes to mind: "it's not a lie if you believe it". I think that captures this dizzy broad's persona. Asserting that YOU believe Kavanaugh "has the most to gain by lying" is a false dilemma you arrange to try to add credibility to your position. Clearly, the political stakes are enormous on both sides, and - as such - the GOP would have required stringent background checks on their applicant to be willing to risk putting up a nominee in such a politically charged climate.

 

Likewise, the Dems have ON RECORD said that they will do "everything possible" to #resist - and this is evidence that they've been following through on their promise. Just the complex ties this woman has to various big Dem players intimately involved in this scene should raise suspicion - and it does...to those open to the consideration.

 

But what really clinched it for me is a laundry list of inconsistencies. In no particular order, and taking into consideration the reality that many of the abused do not report abuse, what matters here is the nature of how THIS allegation came to light, and the circumstances subsequent::

 

- she chose to make her allegation political, INSTEAD of making it about justice. To this day, no charges have been filed in order for Maryland authorities - the proper jurisdiction - to look into the claims. There is no statute of limitations on a charge leveled of sexual impropriety, if the specifics of the claim are severe enough. The FBI has no jurisdiction, and the FBI has repeatedly explained it. The only reason that the FBI had purview in Hill/Thomas incident is because it took place on federal property, between federal employees.

 

- she still refuses to share her therapy notes

 

- the nature of the polygraph: questions asked/details have not been disclosed; have been intentionally manipulated with a narrative that begs an appeal to authority which doesn't exist.

 

- she named people she believed would corroborate her claims. None of them did; the best any of them (one of them) did is say "they believe her".

 

- her side/her have been caught lying. When Grassley/Graham offered to go to HER to get her testimony, she didn't appear to even KNOW that the offer was made. That means that she was heavily 'handled', and not at ALL in control. They claimed she was in California at the time, events revealed subsequently demonstrated that she was actually in Delaware, and fully able to make the time frame that was initially offered. She claimed that she was afraid of flying, yet she was flying all over the country before and during this circus.

 

- she was handled even in the hearing; bracketed by two supposedly pro-bono attorneys - one of which had an envelope (one of two in her hands) by Sheila Jackson-Lee. Pro-bono?

 

- Her own mannerisms belied the fabrications layered on top of vague truths. She pivoted immediately from little-girl/weepy voice during her read testimony to bright/sunny "I got my coffee" voice in literally 5 seconds. That indicates intentionally contrived emotion. In addition, she looked like a spastic pigeon when arriving in the hearing room; rapid/quick head movements indicate intent to lie. As does protecting vulnerable parts of her body - in her case, her neck - while testifying. She pressed her chin into her neck and lowered her head, looking up each and every time she touched upon the claim that it was Kavanaugh who assaulted her: a clear physical cue belying honesty. https://www.businessinsider.com/11-signs-someone-is-lying-2014-4

 

- She swung from use of complex terms and words to claiming she didn't understand even the simplest words and terms. This too was manipulative nonsense.

 

- her social media/HS history was scrubbed from the 'net before she was put before the public.

 

We cannot allow legally unenforceable claims to disqualify someone, and ruin their lives. If we do, we have put 'beliefs' ahead of the presumption of innocence.

 

And that is the end of civility and rule of law.

 

The Democrats have been rebuffed by the American public. Make no mistake: if the US believed that Kavanaugh was a serial rapist, he wouldn't be getting this confirmation.

 

The American public has concluded that Blasey-Ford is ill/confused - but is manifesting a Constanza - and they are also likewise suspicious that the Dems orchestrated the use of this woman as a means to an end; to #resist in every way they possibly could to take down Kavanaugh.

 

They've failed, and they've used every ounce of their political capital in the process. They are going to be crushed in November.

 

She passed a polygraph.

 

Let's see if Kavanaugh passes.

 

Figure it out once and for all real easy.

[Djgb13 2,338]

 

She passed a polygraph.

 

Let's see if Kavanaugh passes.

 

Figure it out once and for all real easy.

Polygraphs arent admissible in court. Its also possible to pass a polygraph while lying. Its also possible to fail one while telling the truth. Polygraph doesnt matter here

[Strike 3,957]

 

She passed a polygraph.

 

Let's see if Kavanaugh passes.

 

Figure it out once and for all real easy

 

1) As I said earlier in this thread, anyone who takes a polygraph other than for fun is an idiot.

 

2) Are you talking about the polygraph that had exactly two questions, and no control questions as is considered standard practice for a polygraph exam? THAT polygraph test?

 

[mobb_deep 917]

Polygraphs arent admissible in court. Its also possible to pass a polygraph while lying. Its also possible to fail one while telling the truth. Polygraph doesnt matter here

 

Of course it doesn't. That would make too much sense and be too convenient. Let's all speculate based on our own bias, instead of using the results of a test that are generally very accurate and require quite a bit of training and know with all to trick.

 

"law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses” & the tests “serve law enforcement purposes.” - BK

[mobb_deep 917]

 

1) As I said earlier in this thread, anyone who takes a polygraph other than for fun is an idiot.

 

2) Are you talking about the polygraph that had exactly two questions, and no control questions as is considered standard practice for a polygraph exam? THAT polygraph test?

 

 

Oh look. Another Trump guy that doesn't believe the polygraph. Color me shocked.

[wiffleball 4,639]

On Christ. Now they're dragging this out again.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

 

Oh look. Another Trump guy that doesn't believe the polygraph. Color me shocked.

 

 

Why do you keep falling back on the failed talking points? Polygraph? FBI Investigation? You were told why those don't prove credibility, yet you keep repeating them. One isn't even ADMISSIBLE IN A COURT OF LAW. Is that the last gasp of someone who has ZERO evidence?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

On Christ. Now they're dragging this ###### out again.

 

Apparently the Dems have cornered Jeff Flake in a room. He said this morning he would vote for Kavanaugh - if he flips then "Flake" is a great last name.

[Strike 3,957]

 

Oh look. Another Trump guy that doesn't believe the polygraph. Color me shocked.

 

Who's a "Trump" guy? I didn't vote for the guy and think he's an a-hole. So there. As far as polygraphs go, there's a reason they aren't admissible in court. They're not reliable. I posted this earlier in this thread but you probably didn't read it because you probably don't care about the actual facts:

 

http://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

[Mr. Hand 482]

 

Oh look. Another Trump guy that doesn't believe the polygraph. Color me shocked.

She couldn't even remember the date she took the polygraph and apparently it was either the day of or the day after her grandmothers funeral.

[mobb_deep 917]

 

 

Why do you keep falling back on the failed talking points? Polygraph? FBI Investigation? You were told why those don't prove credibility, yet you keep repeating them. Is that the last gasp of someone who has ZERO evidence?

 

Just because you guys don't accept the evidence doesn't mean it isn't is evidence.

[Mr. Hand 482]

 

Just because you guys don't accept the evidence doesn't mean it isn't is evidence.

Now you sound like Sho Nuff.

[wiffleball 4,639]

The one Trope I keep hearing from the left is the Kavanaugh has more to lose. Well that's a syllogism at best. That means anybody could walk up to anybody who has something to lose and make a baseless accusation and say well you have much more to lose than I do so therefore I'm more credible!

 

The other distinction that keeps getting thrown around is the Dems say that the three people that Ford says would support her claim didn't actually deny it. And that Kav was lying by saying that they denied that the rape occurred. Republicans on the other hand say those three people said the rape didn't occur.

 

What they really said is, I have absolutely no reason to believe that the rape occurred. I have no proof that the rape occurred or didn't.

 

So Ford basically lied when she first brought them forward. But that aside, it's a wash. You throw all three of them out the window as they're worthless. Ford should never have mentioned them. But once she did, it's proper for Kev to say no they don't support Ford's assertion.

[mobb_deep 917]

 

Who's a "Trump" guy? I didn't vote for the guy and think he's an a-hole. So there. As far as polygraphs go, there's a reason they aren't admissible in court. They're not reliable. I posted this earlier in this thread but you probably didn't read it because you probably don't care about the actual facts:

 

http://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

 

The thread is 57 pages, so you'll have to forgive me if I missed a reply or two.

 

It doesn't matter anyways. I believe her. I believe the polygraph. I believe they're generally pretty accurate, just like Judge Kavanaugh does. The big difference with me, is I don't even think it matters. He was a drunk kid who got a little touchy. He's not some sort of sexual predator or whatever they're painting him as.

[KSB2424 3,082]

 

Oh look. Another Trump guy that doesn't believe the polygraph. Color me shocked.

 

In fairness the polygraph had two relevant questions and nobody will give the actual results, or who paid for it or much of anything. Sketchy at best, like most all of this. Just sayin'

[Strike 3,957]

 

The thread is 57 pages, so you'll have to forgive me if I missed a reply or two.

 

It doesn't matter anyways. I believe her. I believe the polygraph. I believe they're generally pretty accurate, just like Judge Kavanaugh does.

 

You didn't even read the link, did you? Anyways, specifically what do you know about the polygraph test Ford took? What was the procedure, how many questions, what was the nature of the questions, etc......I just want to see that you're actually educated about her test and not just following talking points. So, tell me what you know about the test she took.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

 

Just because you guys don't accept the evidence doesn't mean it isn't is evidence.

 

Once again, a polygraph is NOT evidence. What's so hard for you to understand about that? the FBI investigation is simply going to give you the exact information they already have. It's 36 years old, man.

[Strike 3,957]

 

In fairness the polygraph had two relevant questions and nobody will give the actual results, or who paid for it or much of anything. Sketchy at best, like most all of this. Just sayin'

 

The results are public.

[mobb_deep 917]

 

You didn't even read the link, did you? Anyways, specifically what do you know about the polygraph test Ford took? What was the procedure, how many questions, what was the nature of the questions, etc......I just want to see that you're actually educated about her test and not just following talking points. So, tell me what you know about the test she took.

 

She was interviewed about the letter she wrote to Feinstein and then took a polygraph that asked her if any part of the statement was made up, or if any of that statement was false. The conclusion was she was being truthful within .02 percent.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

Yep. Flake just flaked. the Democrats got to him. that @sshole.

[wiffleball 4,639]

One of the many ways that women lie is through overstatement and hyperbole.

 

Think about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. Never a single complaint about Brad being abusive. Then when the divorce is on the table suddenly the FBI is called in because he grabbed the kids arm or something? That's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

 

-----------

 

In this case, "oh I feared for my life cuz he put his hand on my mouth I could have died!" What? Are you a muppet? You don't have a nose?

 

So horny high schooler at best dry-humped you. Oh get the fucck over it.

 

By me2 terms these days, holding a handshake even a second longer than a woman wants is considered sexual assault.

 

Point being, it's not something that traumatizes normal people 35 years later.

[mobb_deep 917]

 

Once again, a polygraph is NOT evidence. What's so hard for you to understand about that? the FBI investigation is simply going to give you the exact information they already have. It's 36 years old, man.

 

And we're not talking about whether or not he should be in prison or not. We're talking about whether we believe BK or Ford. You believe BK for his testimony, and I believe Ford because of her testimony and the polygraph results.

[Mr. Hand 482]

Yep. Flake just flaked. the Democrats got to him. that ###### @sshole.

It doesn't seem that bad, it's just an agreement to vote to delay the full vote of the Senate for one week so the FBI can investigate.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,513]

 

And we're not talking about whether or not he should be in prison or not. We're talking about whether we believe BK or Ford. You believe BK for his testimony, and I believe Ford because of her testimony and the polygraph results.

 

And again, polygraphs don't mean shite.