He held it together for awhile. He actually treated Dr. Ford with some respect and said the right things. But then he gets in front of a bunch of Mississippi yokels and goes off on her, mocking her, etc., This would have been more tolerable had he taken this tact from the beginning. By starting out with the whole respect thing he showed one side and then the real DT came out. The man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy, nothing but class.
It's not about mercy. Humanitarians tend to abolish justice and substitute mercy for it. C.S. Lewis' "The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment" may help you understand justice vs mercy: better, I guess.
Link: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ResJud/1954/30.pdf
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
among other "no evidence" pronouncements by you in the past. I seem to remember absolute statements by you on other subjects as well.
I agree that testimony is evidence. Some testimonial evidence is trustworthy (whether under oath or not). Some is not. In the courts, some testimony is barred outright. Other testimony is allowed. The job of the decider of facts (in this case, the Senate, believe it or not, as a proxy for the people) is to decide which testimonial evidence is credible, and which testimonial evidence is not credible. But, any time anyone says that the evidence is not credible (as Trump did), you guys go off the deep end about respecting the accuser. You don't want to evaluate the credibility of the testimonial evidence.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
And factually there is no evidence which corroborates her statement.
Stop being lame.
(no message)
Of Double IPAs
You aren't going to argue that she should be treated like a victim in a court case, are you? I thought this was just a job interview, and normal legal protections of witnesses don't apply. The Left has said that this is just a job interview. She is just providing a reference as part of that job interview. It's not like she is a witness in court. She is participating in a public, political process.
Plus, she perjured herself. Are we not allowed to comment on that...to comment on the reliability of the reference, because we have to respect the reference?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Why not prosecute Ford? Are some lies under oath permitted in your opinion? This question is directly related to your questions to me. I would like to understand which categories of lies under oath should be permissible and which should not.
The first one is pure nitpicking. She gave names of witnesses to corroborate, and those witnesses said they didn't remember seeing what she said happened. When he characterized the witnesses statements, he said that her own witnesses refuted her. They kind of did. She said they were there; they said they saw nothing. But HuffPo says the witnesses didn't "refute" her, they just failed to corroborate her story. Okaaaay.
The second one is also a stretch at best: Kavanaugh said, “I never attended a gathering like the one Dr. Ford describes in her allegation.” But, HuffPo notes that his calender shows he went to parties with his friends where there was beer. Okaaaay.
On the assumption that the two best "lies" were listed first, I stopped reading, and I feel confident Kavanaugh didn't lie.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Piece of shit
(no message)
(no message)
She is worse than Hillary
Hope she’s your nominee....how can we help?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Link: https://www.theonion.com/tag/joseph-biden
(no message)
(no message)
She would make a great nominee.
(no message)
her out.
Guess whatChris, woman can lie just like men. She has so many lies in her story that it isn't even in doubt.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Granted, Trump makes himself especially susceptible to accusations like that. But this didn't seem as bad as the people are trying to say. He just called into question her memory of basic facts in front of the jury.
Also mockery:
The man is a total asshole.
(no message)
(no message)
Doesn't matter, though. He is making a closing argument in front of the jury, trying to discredit the key testimony, which he believes is a lie. A little leeway, your honor? A man's life is at stake.
He said she didn't know how many years ago. She said it was 1982.
He said she didn't know if it was upstairs or down. She said upstairs.
He was having some fun with the hicks and the yokels and the fucktards.
(no message)
That is exactly what we need the Dems to keep doing.
Look how successful it was 2 years ago.
The Dems. The party of pompous pricks like Chris
"Keep your storied pomp!" cries Lady Liberty to you sir! The "tempest-tost" are what makes our society strong.
You are mixing your references, as usual.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
You seem to have a low regard for the common man...sort of like Gruber. You rely on them for power, but you hold them in very low regard.
(no message)
Yeah, he's a jerk. I often think: "Is this someone I would invite over to dinner?"
I wouldn't invite Trump to dinner. There are Democrats I would invite to dinner. Most of my friends from ND are Democrats. There are Republicans I would not invite to dinner. Trump is one of them.
But, Ford is fair game. She chose to enter the political arena. This is not a trial of a rapist, where the victim needs protection. This is a job interview (as you guys have told me), and she is trying to sabotage his job application for something he supposedly did 36 years ago for which she has no evidence...and regarding which she remained silent for 36 years until he applied for a job that offended her political senses. She might be telling the truth, but that doesn't change the fact that this is all fair game, and the outrage over Trump doing what Trump does is just business as usual. I don't think he mocked her...I wouldn't put him above that, but I think if he mocked her, you would have better video. And, so what if he did? She signed up for this (assuming the Dems didn't force this on her).
and simply pointed out its numerous holes and inconsistencies.
That you guys ran with her story like you were carrying the Olympic Torch is truly embarrassing.
Link: https://twitter.com/Alyssa_Milano/status/1047295973976752128
you pollute the waters of civility with your misogyny.
(no message)
As well as a serial assaulter of women.
(no message)
You think the D’s and their operatives would come up with a better story?
The fact that she freely admits she doesn’t remember some of the details adds, not subtracts from her credibility. As well as the fact that she lists two of his best friends as witnessses. You don’t make up corroboration for the other side.
$1M Go Fund Me account
This is not so hard to believe. We have people being arrested for pledging to assassinate the president in real life. Someone trying to perform a social media assassination of a SCOTUS nominee (given the importance of SCOTUS) is much easier to believe. This type of behavior has been going on since he was elected.
Trump also was not at issue in 2012 when she brought this up first.
And, I don't think she is being rational.
Again, she may in fact be telling the truth. But, she is acting out of political animus.
Where is the evidence of her blazing political activism that she would make up a story that’s completely untrue, testify to it under oath, and upset what appeared to be a set lifestyle in order to derail Bart?
She seems to have become yer typical Cali tree hugger, granola munching Palo Alto academic lib, but that’s about it.
I didn't say she made up the entire story. Some of it may be true. She probably believes it is.
That would preclude her from having made up the story because of Trump.
Her decision to go public is a different matter. According to her she had decided not to go public and it wasn’t until the D’s leaked it and reporters ended up on her doorstep that she changed her mind.
Doesn’t sound like someone blindly partisan enough to make up a story about Kavanaugh assaulting her.
None of this should disqualify Kavanaugh. I wouldn't have picked him, because he is pretty mainstream and somewhat of a statist (supposedly). But, we are here now, and he is all we have to work with. The fight against him seems totally disingenuous. This is about the Left wanting to kill babies. It has nothing to do with an alleged drunken groping that happened in high school 36 years ago. If he were pro-choice, Ford would not have come forward with her letter, and the Dems would be suppressing these stories, not publicizing them.
Again, my opinion only; I don’t think she’s entirely making it up and something he shouldn’t have done happened between the two. However, that is not proven or corroborated. I also think his performance was disssembling and poor at the last hearing. I am willing to overlook that though on the off chance that he is innocent and that could cause a rational person to act and speak irrationally. As I said based upon what I currently know, I would vote to confirm.
Just don’t tell me what a great guy he was back then, because I don’t think he was. I think it quite conceivable that she’s telling the truth, but that can’t be verified. I also still don’t know what he is today. I hope not that insufferable bro jerk he obviously was back then.
Neither political side has covered themselves with glory here. The D’s pulled an ambush setup job on allegations that they knew they couldn’t prove. The R’s are trying to just ram this through without doing proper due diligence. Typical.
Here is something far more concerning as far as him siting on SCOTUS. See the link.
Link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/my-battle-brett-kavanaugh-over-truth-ambrose-evans-pritchard/
(no message)
Are you fuckin nuts?
Also, she has security moving and other expenses. She may not see that much out of it.
That's all you have Frank
Excuses
Oh yeah, and childish names
Frank is trying to make excuses for lying/forgetting. Frank is explaining to you why it is implausible that she made up the story.
Is "excuses" from the foxnews fans madlibs special collection?
(no message)
(no message)
And do you believe a POTUS should mock and ridicule anyone especially to a national audience - one who himself is charged with bad behavior?
(no message)
(no message)
No one should be surprised.
He is an embarrassment to the nation as well as a tax cheat and Putin ass licker.
The base either believes that it is an unfair media/Democrat smear campaign, or that teenage "boys being boys" is irrelevant.
Moreover, lack of candor takes a back seat to ideology. Why wouldn't it, given their continued and undying support for Trump?
So, Trump is running with the bulls, as is his tendency.
The Dems would never do that
Fucking hypocrits