DiFi had letter for 2 months but said nothing during hearings or interview, DiFi and Ford’s lawyer said when asked why they waited until after hearings that Ford wasn’t planning on coming forward but nonetheless she took a polygraph in August, her only corroborating witness has openly stated it never happened, 36 yrs ago as a teen, she can’t remember the time or date, she never bothered to bring it up before, the Dems are desperately seeking a delay in hopes of winning back the senate, Dems have done this exact thing before with Anita Hill who made a entire career out of her lie.
And as of now, Ford won’t show up to testify with her lawyer saying that it “isn’t her job to prove this” while Kav will show up and answer all questions. And of course, Kavanaugh vehemently denies the charge
Really?!
Not sure how you guys can look yourself in the mirror, Merick Garland was held up based on legal procedure with a lame duck president who didn’t control the senate, but apparently Dems are again ok with trying to ruin a person’s life to achieve their ends.
Well, your rules. And I can’t wait to see you get it back in spades (we will do it without the lies that come requisite with the Liberal philosophy.
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/18/brett-kavanaughs-mother-is-judge-who-dismissed-foreclosure-action-against-accuser-fords-parents.html
Will you be apologizing to the board for making a blatantly false allegation? Will your FOX TV people retract their story and in doing so, correct it for the record?
Also will you now be relying on another news source for your information?
Can't anyone read here?
In the messages.
Note his multiple edits. .
Thanks for playing
Republicans dragging her through the mud now, she would have been wise to remain anonymous.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
She is probably realizing she will be questioned by Kavanaugh’s Attorney who will gut her like a Rainbow Trout for her lies. Dumbass may have bitten off more than she can chew.
(no message)
(no message)
From Wiki
"Hill then became an assistant professor at the Evangelical Christian O. W. Coburn School of Law at Oral Roberts University where she taught from 1983 to 1986.[8] In 1986, she joined the faculty at the University of Oklahoma College of Law where she taught commercial law and contracts
She is a university professor of social policy, law, and women's studies at Brandeis University and a faculty member of Brandeis' Heller School for Social Policy and Management
After graduating as valedictorian from Morris High School, Oklahoma, she enrolled at Oklahoma State University and received a bachelor's degree in psychology with honors in 1977. She went on to Yale Law School, obtaining her Juris Doctor degree with honors in 1980"
-----------
I'm at a loss how her career benefited by coming forth with a tale of sexual and verbal abuse from her boss. More than likely, her career path was hampered a great deal by facing her abuser in public. And yet, she found her way to prominence at a respected university. How far would she have gone in a career she may have hoped for?
From what I can tell, most female accusers don't benefit (the outlier being the Clinton accusers) from making public claims about sexual abuse and attacks against males let alone political figures. Women are generally ostracized in their communities so I can't image what that translates to on the national stage.
I'm glad my political ideology does not demand that I excuse and defend every sleaze ball rapist and groper and harasser as part of an idiotic, quixotic effort to save the unborn.
Watch those Anita Hill hearings. They were a national disgrace.
(no message)
...and that the Trumpamaniacs will swallow it all.
are you really a lawyer that you don't know this?
(no message)
"a common feature of many conspiracy theories: mistaking coincidental and tangential encounters for meaningful and substantial conflicts and connections."
unsullied, unvarnished, truth and facts bearers.
Thanks for the update from FOX TV, I was sure they had an open minded view of a woman making accusations against a Republican choice.
(no message)
Also, a sympathetic tester is helpful.
Conor would likely have a field day with this witness, and he knows it.
(no message)
(no message)
But then again, all you need is to convince 2 on the fence pro abortion senators and one pseudo dem (Flake) without losing Manchin.....so I suppose it has an outside shot. But lets all call this farce what it is.
your noise is always the same. Someone who is a Republican with a smidgen of integrity or a pale conscience is a pseudo something or other or a flat our RINO.
And a person with information you don't like is crazy with bad credentials.
Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi
You're TOO easy to dissect.