Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vuduchile

Kavanaugh sexual misconduct in High School

Recommended Posts

Quote from polygrapher expert Jerry Hanafin about Dr. Ford's lie detector test.

 

"I had it independently reviewed by four other polygraph examiners, two are retired from the FBI, two from local law enforcement with over 20 years of polygraph experience, and all four of them stated from the analysis from the charts that she passed the test"

 

And what exactly does lying judge Kav have to back up his story? A repetitive string of denials and a sloppily written calendar.

 

Polygraph tests are inadmissible in a court of law, so WHY should we believe it? Stop pushing this nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The evidence is certainly building up for the accuser(s) at this stage. Evidence is better than simple accusation of course, and better than simple denials. I would assess that the tilt against the Judge is starting to build.

 

Huh? What "evidence" is building up FOR the accusers? Or are you simply talking about the optics of the situation? Because the actual TRUTH of the matter is that the accusers have ZERO evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best you got is two guys coming forward now on their own to admit to a crime in state with no statute of limitations.

 

All these women are lying...but this is what you all believe?

yes,very very very easy to believe.

We know how low and dirty femocrats are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sworn testimony...sworn statements...those are all evidence.

evidence is a body of facts

 

None of those are facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now two guys have come forward saying they were the boys in the room with Ford.

 

:lol:

 

And these are Days of our Lives......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how you find fire out more about these accusers? You have a group of experts actually investigate the matter.

You know how you make this process drag on-and-on forever? You go outside the U.S. Capitol building and ask the protesters picketing outside if anyone wants to make sexually assault allegations against Brett Kavenaugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now two guys have come forward saying they were the boys in the room with Ford.

 

:lol:

 

And these are Days of our Lives......

Another two persons stealing my ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes,very very very easy to believe.

We know how low and dirty femocrats are.

 

The hypocrisy here is funny. Whine all the time about anonymous sources. Believe two anonymous guys who willingly are admitting to a crime...and by some reports both first admitted to being the one who attacked her. So they are both Kavanaugh and can't explain how she also named Ford.

 

evidence is a body of facts

 

None of those are facts.

 

Actually...that is not the definition of evidence...you are once again complete wrong. But you won't admit it.

https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=671

"It can include oral testimony of witnesses, including experts on technical matters, documents, public records, objects, photographs and depositions (testimony under oath taken before trial)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how you find fire out more about these accusers? You have a group of experts actually investigate the matter.

Go for it. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kav could put this to rest by taking a polygraph of his own, like his accuser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The hypocrisy here is funny. Whine all the time about anonymous sources. Believe two anonymous guys who willingly are admitting to a crime...and by some reports both first admitted to being the one who attacked her. So they are both Kavanaugh and can't explain how she also named Ford.

 

 

Actually...that is not the definition of evidence...you are once again complete wrong. But you won't admit it.

https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=671

"It can include oral testimony of witnesses, including experts on technical matters, documents, public records, objects, photographs and depositions (testimony under oath taken before trial)"

When you first heard about their testimony, your initial reaction, that's how the rest of us felt about CBF's tesimony.

 

At any rate, their unsubstantiated testimony should be treated as valid as hers and the rest of the bimbo eruption's unsubstantiated testimony. Ignored. We can't run a SCOTUS confirmation hearing like a circus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sho Nuff, do you get paid to post here? Youre a machine.

 

I heard this is actually his part-time forum, he has another full-time forum..

 

Let that sink in..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Late term abortions are just a talking point, as they are rarely performed. When they occur, it usually for medical indications. From the CDC:

 

Id say over one out of every 100 isnt rare, Doc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you first heard about their testimony, your initial reaction, that's how the rest of us felt about CBF's tesimony.

 

At any rate, their unsubstantiated testimony should be treated as valid as hers and the rest of the bimbo eruption's unsubstantiated testimony. Ignored. We can't run a SCOTUS confirmation hearing like a circus.

 

Absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I heard this is actually his part-time forum, he has another full-time forum..

 

Let that sink in..

 

Yep. If you think he posts a lot here, you should head over to footballgheys and watch him. Except over there liberals are aggressively protected by the mods. It's basically a Marxist echo-chamber with a Social Justice Warrior manifesto added on top. The virtue signalling is also thru the roof.

 

Don't believe sho when he tells you he has a real job. His job is to post on forums as a paid or non-paid schill for the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for it. :thumbsup:

Good...so you finally agree that this should be investigated further before he is put on bench...only took a few days to get you to where Ive been at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you first heard about their testimony, your initial reaction, that's how the rest of us felt about CBF's tesimony.

 

At any rate, their unsubstantiated testimony should be treated as valid as hers and the rest of the bimbo eruption's unsubstantiated testimony. Ignored. We can't run a SCOTUS confirmation hearing like a circus.

 

Not quite as valid if they remain anonymous and are both confessing to being mistaken for Kavanaugh? Right?

As for ignoring all of it...sorry, but no. THere is no way you can just ignore this about a SC nominee...that would be ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet she doesnt show up.

So you think she sent in her opening statement...but won't actually show up?

Hit yourself in the head with a hammer...it won't do any further damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how you find fire out more about these accusers? You have a group of experts actually investigate the matter.

Like former ICE and ATF agents? That's who I read was investigating for the Judiciary Committee. Or does it have to be FBI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like former ICE and ATF agents? That's who I read was investigating for the Judiciary Committee. Or does it have to be FBI?

 

You went from Judiciary Committee investigators...to former ICE and ATF because someone claimed that.

Again...a link to who actually investigated and if they did anything other than take his statement?

And that is who apparently took Kavanaugh's testimony...they have not investigated the accusations and accusers nor these two new anonymous "Kavanaugh's".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You went from Judiciary Committee investigators...to former ICE and ATF because someone claimed that.

Again...a link to who actually investigated and if they did anything other than take his statement?

And that is who apparently took Kavanaugh's testimony...they have not investigated the accusations and accusers nor these two new anonymous "Kavanaugh's".

Chuck Grassley Twitter work? A quote from his account. You can go to his Twitter and see it.

 

"Abt 20 of my cmte investigators are tracking down all allegations/leads & talking to all witnesses & gathering all evidence. We have experienced fed agents on detail from ATF+ICE along w seasoned congressional investigators from my nominations & oversight teams +temp SCOTUS staff"

 

So according to him, they are investigating all witnesses and gathering evidence :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck Grassley Twitter work? A quote from his account. You can go to his Twitter and see it.

 

"Abt 20 of my cmte investigators are tracking down all allegations/leads & talking to all witnesses & gathering all evidence. We have experienced fed agents on detail from ATF+ICE along w seasoned congressional investigators from my nominations & oversight teams +temp SCOTUS staff"

 

So according to him, they are investigating all witnesses and gathering evidence :dunno:

 

You should listen to him now and read what they have actually done.

There have been on intereviews with these witnesses...all have only submitted letters and Judge then went and hid and refuses to actually testify.

None of which states what was claimed as far as this being actually investigated and interviewed by those people.

And no official statement from any actual investigator stating what was done or looked at..just a claim by Grassely.

Good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grassly owned the Democrats in that opening. Bringing in the Biden quote from the 80's was a masterstroke.

Its 10:30. Youre actually watching this hearing and live blogging about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You should listen to him now and read what they have actually done.

There have been on intereviews with these witnesses...all have only submitted letters and Judge then went and hid and refuses to actually testify.

None of which states what was claimed as far as this being actually investigated and interviewed by those people.

And no official statement from any actual investigator stating what was done or looked at..just a claim by Grassely.

Good one.

Do you have a link that shows no witnesses were interviewed by these investigators? Do you have a link that shows no investigators are out gathering evidence? I'm not being a wise azz, just looking for something that states or proves Grassley is lying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the quote?

 

He repeated, verbatim, what Joe Biden said about "FBI investigations" during the nomination process in 1991:

 

https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1044735563222437888

 

And yet, Feinstein is still pushing for FBI investigations during her opening statements (and delay the vote).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is what drobeski wouldnt linknto after being asked multiple times.

Because look at at that link...

Ray asked for a synopsis. I gave him one. I saw something similar days ago on Twitter but didn't think much of it as theres no proof it happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×