• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Lessons to be learned from the Kavanaugh Hearing

Go with that. Booferism is a guaranteed, sure-fire path for the Democrats to regain power. Make that the centerpiece of every single campaign.

Kavanagh was lying, and comically so. Why should that be so blithely dismissed as a measure of his character?
 
Perjury on otherwise nearly irrelevant trivialities, so they tell us not only that he's willing to commit perjury, but also that it takes almost nothing to get him to.

This. So easily explained away as youthful chatter, but as a Supreme Court nominee he lies without a second thought
 
Kavanagh was lying, and comically so. Why should that be so blithely dismissed as a measure of his character?

I keep hearing this, and yet the examples people point to keep turning out to be bull ****, like the accusation that he said he never drank while under age.
 
I keep hearing this, and yet the examples people point to keep turning out to be bull ****, like the accusation that he said he never drank while under age.

You made a valid point upthread, that he technically didn't claim that he was of legal age (that it was sledgehammered in implication is pretty obvious, but never mind).

But what of these absurd justifications for boofing and the Devils Triangle? Transparent lies, and as I've noted, easily explainable as youthful immaturity. But he lied. In the here and now, to the Senate. Should that be swept under the rug?
 
That's why Kennedy was so interesting. I don't mind bias, but one has to be able to look beyond that and sometimes act against their personal opinions in order to think about the larger issues.

Kennedy, although more conservative than otherwise, was the swing vote on many SC decisions. He was not an extremist. Trump and the GOP should have nominated someone more along that line than Kav who is definitely far right. He replaced one conservative with another conservative with Gorsuch. If he weren't playing to his right wing base, Trump could/should have nominated someone acceptable to both sides and avoided all this. But, Trump being Trump ...
 
We're not a nation of laws because we follow the law as laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

Maybe a touch of the old Bastinado would have got the truth out of Kavanaugh?

A bit late to respond, sorry.

No, you aren't a nation of laws because you have a highly politicized justice system. I suspect the reason you have such an impaired justice system is because you are limited by your constitution. A constitution that works is one that is general. Your's is obviously much too specific if you have so vastly different readings of it that it fuels opposing ideologies. This makes the arbiters of the constitution partisan by design.
 
Another lesson for the Candidate might be to not be "communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim".
Otherwise known as witness tampering or obstruction of justice.

Article
 
Yeah, but there were only 5 people at this party. And once Dr. Ford left, Leland Keyser would have been there all alone with 3 drunks guys eager to rape someone.

Does Ford say there were only 5 people at the party, or does she actually say she only remembers five specific people? Which would leave open the possibility of there being several other people there that she doesn't remember, wouldn't it?

I am posing this as a question as I haven't read everything she's said or written about the incident and don't know the answer.

But I've watched her statement in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and what she said is:

"There were four boys I remember specifically being at the house..." and then she names three of them. That doesn't in itself suggest that there weren't other people at the party, does it?
 
We would be wise to keep in mind that Kav wasn't just addressing the committee senators. His most important audience was Trump. Followed by the Republican base. Any lies of ommission or inference, such as his 'suggestion' to have been legally drinking as a senior, would be aimed at the less informed, more credulous and more partisan in the audience. Who would gleefully latch onto any supporting elements of his testimony.

While we can rightly say that it would be foolish for Kav to try to fool his more discerning and oppositional interlocutors, at that time the strategy, the grand plan, was that the Ds didn't matter because the Goopers were gonna ram his confirmation through in any event. Kav had only to give them some semblance of cover to support a "yes."
 
We would be wise to keep in mind that Kav wasn't just addressing the committee senators. His most important audience was Trump. Followed by the Republican base. Any lies of ommission or inference, such as his 'suggestion' to have been legally drinking as a senior, would be aimed at the less informed, more credulous and more partisan in the audience. Who would gleefully latch onto any supporting elements of his testimony.

While we can rightly say that it would be foolish for Kav to try to fool his more discerning and oppositional interlocutors, at that time the strategy, the grand plan, was that the Ds didn't matter because the Goopers were gonna ram his confirmation through in any event. Kav had only to give them some semblance of cover to support a "yes."

How good a SC justice can he make if he can't even win a show hearing already rigged in his favor?
 
Does Ford say there were only 5 people at the party, or does she actually say she only remembers five specific people? Which would leave open the possibility of there being several other people there that she doesn't remember, wouldn't it?

I am posing this as a question as I haven't read everything she's said or written about the incident and don't know the answer.

But I've watched her statement in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and what she said is:

"There were four boys I remember specifically being at the house..." and then she names three of them. That doesn't in itself suggest that there weren't other people at the party, does it?

Good question. I have never seen anything that says there were ONLY 5 other people at the house, only that she could remember specifically the 4 boys and Leland Keyser. That does not exclude other people being there. No luck finding anything by googling on this either.
 
Does Ford say there were only 5 people at the party, or does she actually say she only remembers five specific people? Which would leave open the possibility of there being several other people there that she doesn't remember, wouldn't it?

I am posing this as a question as I haven't read everything she's said or written about the incident and don't know the answer.

But I've watched her statement in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and what she said is:

"There were four boys I remember specifically being at the house..." and then she names three of them. That doesn't in itself suggest that there weren't other people at the party, does it?


"Rachel Mitchell proceeded to ask Ford about details in the letter she had originally submitted to Congress. Asked to read it again for accuracy, Ford took the opportunity to make a couple of 'corrections.' She had originally said there were four other people at the party, but she clarified to say that she could not be sure if more people weren’t there as well."

Dr. Ford: “I can’t guarantee that there weren’t a few other people there, but they are not in the purview of my memory.”
 
Last edited:
I wonder if it's confusion or dishonesty that makes people keep saying that Ford stated there were only five (or six) people at the party, when she doesn't seem to have ever stated this.
 
I wonder if it's confusion or dishonesty that makes people keep saying that Ford stated there were only five (or six) people at the party, when she doesn't seem to have ever stated this.

There are lots of lies being spread by Republicans and the Right Wing media about Ford's testimony and all of the other women.
 
I wonder if it's confusion or dishonesty that makes people keep saying that Ford stated there were only five (or six) people at the party, when she doesn't seem to have ever stated this.


In the letter she submitted to Congress she said there were 4 other people at the party.

But, the only detail she is steadfast certain about is that she only had one beer -- that part of her story is rock solid.
 
Last edited:
The only detail she is certain about is that she only had one beer -- that part of her story is rock solid.

Squawk! Who's a pretty bird? Squawk!

You should acknowledge even paraphrases when you're quoting your dear leader. You know how Donnie Johnny feels about getting credit for things (whether he did them or not).

But I do want this to continue. Every time that horse's ass opens his mouth, scratch another 500 educated suburbanite voters from the GOP side of the ledger.

Wed: I'll listen to the evidence.
Thu: Kavanaugh needs to be confirmed.
Fri: Oops, she was credible.
Fri: Kav was incredible
Fri: Oops, Flake's got us cornered. Say, uh, I'm in favor of an investigation.
Sat: Pssst! Just investigate these four names.
Sun: Hey, I never said to limit the investigation.
Mon: After being caught out in multiple lies I've told the FBI they can investigate anyone they want, but hey, it's not me, they have to do what the Senators want.
Tue: Shameless Mississippi rally mocking Ford!

Yeah! He must be working for the DNC!
 
In the letter she submitted to Congress she said there were 4 other people at the party.

But, the only detail she is steadfast certain about is that she only had one beer -- that part of her story is rock solid.

Yes, The PDJT was very clear on that point in his sickening rally speech tonight.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom