Kavanaugh Confirmation

Even FOX news felt she was credible and moving, so maybe I am not so bias..
Would you be ok with someone from your past coming out and saying that you sexually assaulted them 30 years ago and the only thing that would make it go forward would be that this person spoke well and sounded believable in a hearing? All of this would be different from me if there were others who could corroborate her account of this alleged sexual assault.
 
the prosecutor is setting Ford up. weve had what 4 or 5 corrections? itll come together.
I really didn't understand why Kavanaugh lied in the FOX interview about being some choir boy. It makes me suspect. I don't mind another Republican on the court, but I'd prefer someone who isn't a liar and may have assaulted someone. I"m watching FOX, because I want to hear all sides of this.
 
I really didn't understand why Kavanaugh lied in the FOX interview about being some choir boy. It makes me suspect. I don't mind another Republican on the court, but I'd prefer someone who isn't a liar and may have assaulted someone. I"m watching FOX, because I want to hear all sides of this.
how do you know he lied, where you present? You should call Feinstein ASAP if you were there
 
I really didn't understand why Kavanaugh lied in the FOX interview about being some choir boy. It makes me suspect. I don't mind another Republican on the court, but I'd prefer someone who isn't a liar and may have assaulted someone. I"m watching FOX, because I want to hear all sides of this.
Once they drop Kavanaugh, Donald will likely nominate Amy Coney Barrett, who is even more conservative than Kavanaugh and less of a swamp figure. I would have rather her gotten the nomination anyway.
 
Awful format for the Prosecutor. Witness seems credible. Republicans are outmaneuvered.

How so.... the witness can't even say if its 1 or 2 people that either assaulted her or assisted in the assault. And there really is no one collaborating really any part of her story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
I really didn't understand why Kavanaugh lied in the FOX interview about being some choir boy. It makes me suspect. I don't mind another Republican on the court, but I'd prefer someone who isn't a liar and may have assaulted someone. I"m watching FOX, because I want to hear all sides of this.
What's your definition of choir boy?
 
Do you not believe him because you think it is an entitled, elitist, "swamp candidate?" Or do you not believe him for some other reason?

BTW, I agree with you that he's a swamp candidate based on his prior work history for Ken Starr and the Dubya admin. I don't hold the fact that he came from he privileged background and went to Yale against him though.
It’s not that I don’t believe him. I don’t believe the conspiracy that the dims could concoct this scenario with people that are confirmed to have known him and been in the right settings.

It’s not uncommon for drunk little rich boys to perp on an unwilling victim. I’ve seen this culture first hand. Just as slut shaming isn’t uncommon.
 
How so.... the witness can't even say if its 1 or 2 people that either assaulted her or assisted in the assault. And there really is no one collaborating really any part of her story.
Doesn't matter. This story can't be proven or disproven. This is all about optics and who sounds more credible/believable. It's an emotional thing. Shouldn't be, but it is.

The questioning is really disjointed and difficult to follow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496
Awful format for the Prosecutor. Witness seems credible. Republicans are outmaneuvered.
The Rep. Senators are too worried about their reputations going forward, and that is why they are hiding behind the prosecutor. The Dems do not gaf about their reputations because their base doesn't care how scummy they are. The end justifies the means with their side.
 
Awful format for the Prosecutor. Witness seems credible. Republicans are outmaneuvered.

I still have trouble finding her credible since she can't remember the year, if she has clarified that point and I missed it I apologize.
 
Doesn't matter. This story can't be proven or disproven. This is all about optics and who sounds more credible/believable. It's an emotional thing. Shouldn't be, but it is.

The questioning is really disjointed and difficult to follow.

Exactly. Democrats are trying to create empathy for her and are succeeding big time.
 
It’s not uncommon for drunk little rich boys to perp on an unwilling victim. I’ve seen this culture first hand. Just as slut shaming isn’t uncommon.
Why is that considered a reasonable statement, but "it's not uncommon for young black men in bad parts of town to deal drugs?" is considered totally out of bounds? Aren't both statements prejudiced? Should any alleged incident be judged on the facts of that specific situation?
 
Would you be ok with someone from your past coming out and saying that you sexually assaulted them 30 years ago and the only thing that would make it go forward would be that this person spoke well and sounded believable in a hearing? All of this would be different from me if there were others who could corroborate her account of this alleged sexual assault.
So you support the subpoena and sworn testimony of Judge???!
 
Doesn't matter. This story can't be proven or disproven. This is all about optics and who sounds more credible/believable. It's an emotional thing. Shouldn't be, but it is.

The questioning is really disjointed and difficult to follow.

Yea, I mean whether you think she is telling her version of the truth (meaning trying to tell the truth) or not is pretty much irrelevant because she can't remember even the most simplest of details like who assaulted her or how she got home or where this was at or when this was. Yet... she has details to people being in certain parts of the house, and some of this contradicts her prior statements under oath.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
Advertisement

Back
Top