New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

Paul2 said:
Did Flake know when he tapped Coons' shoulder and they negotiated the supplemental investigation? Did Mitch O'Connell use Flake's opening in a way Flake didn't anticipate, but now has to be behind because . . . why?
Click to expand...

I don't know what was going through Flake's mind. Although I don't believe McConnell was trying to be fair, just trying to appear to be fair.
 
acbytesla said:
And if the dealer is cheating for Kenny and Kenny knows the cards are stacked in his favor he can pretend to be fair knowing all the time it isn't.
Click to expand...

Cheaters got shot at the card table. Kenny walked away with the money.
 
The FBI spoke to five people, and Ford's lawyers proposed several more.

You seen the list? I have, it is garbage. It is her polygraph examiner, her husband and several people she allegedly told in the last couple years. Several of their sworn statements were already given to the Judiciary Committee and to the FBI. the others were based on media reports. So the FBI takes them at face value, they are all pretty worthless

None of them corroborate anything that happened in 1982. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1047894132377767936?s=21
 
johnny karate said:
You keep making these "conspiracy theory" allegations.

What is this conspiracy theory? What's the conspiracy?
Click to expand...

Conspiracy theory probably isn't the best terminology, that's why I've changed it to boofer troofer.

What did Kavanagh mean when he said boofing?
What did Bush mean when he said "I saw an airplane hit the tower"?
 
The Big Dog said:
The FBI spoke to five people, and Ford's lawyers proposed several more.

You seen the list? I have, it is garbage. It is her polygraph examiner, her husband and several people she allegedly told in the last couple years. Several of their sworn statements were already given to the Judiciary Committee and to the FBI. the others were based on media reports. So the FBI takes them at face value, they are all pretty worthless

None of them corroborate anything that happened in 1982. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1047894132377767936?s=21
Click to expand...

Right, but what of Kavanaugh's demeanor in the hearing?

Oh, that's right. You'd rather ignore that.
 
The Big Dog said:
.....
None of them corroborate anything that happened in 1982. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1047894132377767936?s=21
Click to expand...

If that's true, that's important too. The intent of a complete, fair investigation would be to discover the truth. If witnesses can't corroborate Ford's claims, that should be included. The point is that a written statement, likely drafted or at least reviewed by lawyers, is not the same as an interview/interrogation in a small room with experienced FBI agents. The FBI should be willing to talk to anybody who says "I have evidence to give," if only to rule them out.
 
The Big Dog said:
The FBI spoke to five people, and Ford's lawyers proposed several more.

You seen the list? I have, it is garbage. It is her polygraph examiner, her husband and several people she allegedly told in the last couple years. Several of their sworn statements were already given to the Judiciary Committee and to the FBI. the others were based on media reports. So the FBI takes them at face value, they are all pretty worthless

None of them corroborate anything that happened in 1982. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1047894132377767936?s=21
Click to expand...

What of the list Deborah Ramirez provided?

Deborah Ramirez lawyer rips FBI for ‘failure’ to interview corroborating witnesses

n a Thursday letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and FBI general counsel Dana Boente, one of Ramirez’s attorneys William Pittard acknowledged that the FBI had interviewed Ramirez on Sunday and noted that a list of more than 20 witnesses whom Ramirez “suspected” could back up her allegations.

“Fewer than four days later, however, the FBI apparently has concluded its investigation — without permitting its agents to investigate,” the letter read. “We are deeply disappointed by this failure. We can only conclude that the FBI — or those controlling its investigation — did not want to learn the truth behind Ms. Ramirez’s allegations.”
Click to expand...



ETA: Brietbart is working overtime to discredit Ronan Farrow's reporting on Ramirez's allegations, but Farrow continues to provide corroborating information:

The F.B.I. Probe Ignored Testimonies from Former Classmates of Kavanaugh

Kenneth G. Appold was a suitemate of Kavanaugh’s at the time of the alleged incident. He had previously spoken to The New Yorker about Ramirez on condition of anonymity, but he said that he is now willing to be identified because he believes that the F.B.I. must thoroughly investigate her allegation. Appold, who is the James Hastings Nichols Professor of Reformation History at Princeton Theological Seminary, said that he first heard about the alleged incident involving Kavanaugh and Ramirez either the night it occurred or a day or two later.
Click to expand...
Looking back, Appold said, “The thing I ask myself is, why didn’t anybody do anything about it? Why didn’t anybody report it?” But, he added, “The times were different then. Today, I’m an educator, and if something like this happened, I’d know exactly where to go to the Title IX people. But back then there was no place to report these uncomfortable things—we tried to forget about them.”
Click to expand...
In addition to Appold, several other former Yale classmates said that they had reached out to the F.B.I. about Kavanaugh but had not received a response. Stephen Kantrowitz, a former Yale classmate, said in a text message that, “No one who lived in Lawrance Hall (so far as I know) has been contacted by the FBI What a charade.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
They might be more "expert". But they're no less partisan.

If you want to look at a non-partisan expert evaluation of Kavanaugh, then go ahead and check out the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary's rating for him. They rate him as well qualified. Alternatively, you could ask fellow judges and lawyers who have actually worked with him what he's actually like. But this self-selected sample of complete strangers? There's no reason to take it as anything other than a political opinion.
Click to expand...
Well, no.
 
The Big Dog said:
we demand more hearings and an FBI investigation!
gets more hearings and an FBI investigation
the hearings and FBI investigation were a sham!

predictable as the tides...
Click to expand...

“The water, the tide—it comes in and it goes out. It always goes in, then it goes out. … You can’t explain that. You can’t explain it.”
 
Just imagine 100 Senators crowded in one room to read a single copy of the report.

:thumbsup:
 
acbytesla said:
Just imagine 100 Senators crowded in one room to read a single copy of the report.

:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I mean "imagine" it, because it did not happen, will not happen and it is absolutely beyond ludicrous to suggest that it would happen...

Oh well, the bottom of the barrel can't be too far away now, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom