Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

[HouseDivided]

Amazing how some old white men are still stuck in the 1980s, when they could assert that women are always lying about sexual assault and many people accepted that, instead of the maybe 20% of the population that now chooses to believe that women always lie. Kind of like the last 3 decades when people began listening to all kinds of sexual assault survivors have just passed them by.

Juanita Broaddrick (the shame of it all)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09 ... naugh.html

Believe all women (as long as it advances the Party narrative).

[jhawks99]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BoVRH2mg8Kj ... 1z3hmyv5k0

Thanks oussie, I needed that.

[twocoach]

It’s comforting to know that many, many females who have known Kavanaugh over the last thirty to thirty five years are attesting to his choir boy behavior.

The BTK killer had numerous people who swore he was a fine, upstanding member of society and was elected President of his church board.

Turns out he strangled his neighbor and then took her body to his church and took pictures of it in bondage positions.

Still comforted by some random character statements that prove nothing? So dumb.

[HouseDivided]

It’s comforting to know that many, many females who have known Kavanaugh over the last thirty to thirty five years are attesting to his choir boy behavior.

The BTK killer had numerous people who swore he was a fine, upstanding member of society and was elected President of his church board.

Turns out he strangled his neighbor and then took her body to his church and took pictures of it in bondage positions.

Still comforted by some random character statements that prove nothing? So dumb.

I know, right? There are probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions of BTKs hiding in churches all over this country that folks like us are too dumb to spot. Good thing we have the Left to guide us in all things moral, political, and social.

[twocoach]

It’s comforting to know that many, many females who have known Kavanaugh over the last thirty to thirty five years are attesting to his choir boy behavior.

The BTK killer had numerous people who swore he was a fine, upstanding member of society and was elected President of his church board.

Turns out he strangled his neighbor and then took her body to his church and took pictures of it in bondage positions.

Still comforted by some random character statements that prove nothing? So dumb.

I know, right? There are probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions of BTKs hiding in churches all over this country that folks like us are too dumb to spot. Good thing we have the Left to guide us in all things moral, political, and social.

/\
The above symbol is missing the same thing as your post.

[HouseDivided]

The BTK killer had numerous people who swore he was a fine, upstanding member of society and was elected President of his church board.

Turns out he strangled his neighbor and then took her body to his church and took pictures of it in bondage positions.

Still comforted by some random character statements that prove nothing? So dumb.

I know, right? There are probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions of BTKs hiding in churches all over this country that folks like us are too dumb to spot. Good thing we have the Left to guide us in all things moral, political, and social.

/\
The above symbol is missing the same thing as your post.

Allow me to connect the dots for you. You are using an obvious outlier as a representation of the normal thought processes of a group of people. I could use Ted Bundy as an example that demonstrates that ultra-liberal people in and around the Seattle area are dumb, too. It doesn't work.

[twocoach]

I know, right? There are probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions of BTKs hiding in churches all over this country that folks like us are too dumb to spot. Good thing we have the Left to guide us in all things moral, political, and social.

/\
The above symbol is missing the same thing as your post.

Allow me to connect the dots for you. You are using an obvious outlier as a representation of the normal thought processes of a group of people. I could use Ted Bundy as an example that demonstrates that ultra-liberal people in and around the Seattle area are dumb, too. It doesn't work.

And you are drawing conclusions from statements that simply arent there because you want them to mean what you are saying they mean.

Character support statements are worthless. Stop referring to them as if they have value.

[HouseDivided]

/\
The above symbol is missing the same thing as your post.

Allow me to connect the dots for you. You are using an obvious outlier as a representation of the normal thought processes of a group of people. I could use Ted Bundy as an example that demonstrates that ultra-liberal people in and around the Seattle area are dumb, too. It doesn't work.

And you are drawing conclusions from statements that simply arent there because you want them to mean what you are saying they mean.

Character support statements are worthless. Stop referring to them as if they have value.

The unsubstantiated testimony of a lying individual of questionable character, not to mention unstable mental health are equally worthless, if not more so. Ms. Ford is ridiculous, and you make yourself look equally so by entertaining what she has said.

You should probably stop treating them as if they have value as well.

[twocoach]

Allow me to connect the dots for you. You are using an obvious outlier as a representation of the normal thought processes of a group of people. I could use Ted Bundy as an example that demonstrates that ultra-liberal people in and around the Seattle area are dumb, too. It doesn't work.

And you are drawing conclusions from statements that simply arent there because you want them to mean what you are saying they mean.

Character support statements are worthless. Stop referring to them as if they have value.

The unsubstantiated testimony of a lying individual of questionable character, not to mention unstable mental health are equally worthless, if not more so. Ms. Ford is ridiculous, and you make yourself look equally so by entertaining what she has said.

You should probably stop treating them as if they have value as well.

Please enlighten us as to Ford's "questionable character". I heard nothing in her testimony that was ridiculous to anyone except the crowd that thinks this is all just some crazy made up conspiracy. And there is certainly no proof that she lied about anything in her testimony (unlike Kavanaugh).

[HouseDivided]

And you are drawing conclusions from statements that simply arent there because you want them to mean what you are saying they mean.

Character support statements are worthless. Stop referring to them as if they have value.

The unsubstantiated testimony of a lying individual of questionable character, not to mention unstable mental health are equally worthless, if not more so. Ms. Ford is ridiculous, and you make yourself look equally so by entertaining what she has said.

You should probably stop treating them as if they have value as well.

Please enlighten us as to Ford's "questionable character". I heard nothing in her testimony that was ridiculous to anyone except the crowd that thinks this is all just some crazy made up conspiracy. And there is certainly no proof that she lied about anything in her testimony (unlike Kavanaugh).

Among others:
1. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.
2. Ms. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.
3.When speaking with her husband, Ms. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.
4. Ms. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question – details that could help corroborate her account.
5. Ms. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended – including her lifelong friend.
6. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault.
7. Ms. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events related to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory.
8. Ms. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions.
9.The activities of congressional Democrats and Ms. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Ms. Ford’s account.
10. Ms. Ford refused to provide any of her therapy notes as evidence.

[twocoach]

Too long to deal with through my phone. Will get to that later. But in a nutshell, it is not at all unusual for assault survivors to be in shock and to subsequently not remember certain periphery details. A real investigation could probably get more answers to key points but thats not whats going to be run here. Hopefully they can get a little more substantive info. We will see.

[DrPepper]

House didn’t even watch her testimony. he is just recycling talking points that meet his agenda.

[Deleted User 62]

The unsubstantiated testimony of a lying individual of questionable character, not to mention unstable mental health are equally worthless, if not more so. Ms. Ford is ridiculous, and you make yourself look equally so by entertaining what she has said.

You should probably stop treating them as if they have value as well.

Please enlighten us as to Ford's "questionable character". I heard nothing in her testimony that was ridiculous to anyone except the crowd that thinks this is all just some crazy made up conspiracy. And there is certainly no proof that she lied about anything in her testimony (unlike Kavanaugh).

Among others:
1. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.
2. Ms. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.
3.When speaking with her husband, Ms. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.
4. Ms. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question – details that could help corroborate her account.
5. Ms. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended – including her lifelong friend.
6. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault.
7. Ms. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events related to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory.
8. Ms. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions.
9.The activities of congressional Democrats and Ms. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Ms. Ford’s account.
10. Ms. Ford refused to provide any of her therapy notes as evidence.

1-10 are your opinions. Tragic that you view them as fact.

[HouseDivided]

Please enlighten us as to Ford's "questionable character". I heard nothing in her testimony that was ridiculous to anyone except the crowd that thinks this is all just some crazy made up conspiracy. And there is certainly no proof that she lied about anything in her testimony (unlike Kavanaugh).

Among others:
1. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.
2. Ms. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.
3.When speaking with her husband, Ms. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.
4. Ms. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question – details that could help corroborate her account.
5. Ms. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended – including her lifelong friend.
6. Ms. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault.
7. Ms. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events related to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory.
8. Ms. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions.
9.The activities of congressional Democrats and Ms. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Ms. Ford’s account.
10. Ms. Ford refused to provide any of her therapy notes as evidence.

1-10 are your opinions. Tragic that you view them as fact.

That is about as valid as your default "JFC" response. Considering that her testimony is 100% opinions, it is even more tragic that she (and gullible people like yourself) view them as fact.

[Deleted User 62]

You are saying that she was giving, in her testimony, her opinions?

JFC

[HouseDivided]

You are saying that she was giving, in her testimony, her opinions?

JFC

It sure as heck wasn't verifiable fact. Some might be tempted to call it prevarication.

[Leawood]

You didn't even watch the hearing. I'm certain you didn't read the nine hours of testimony. Another Trump dumbfuck poster boy.

[DCHawk1]

You didn't even watch the hearing. I'm certain you didn't read the nine hours of testimony. Another Trump dumbfuck poster boy.

Why do you bother?

[HouseDivided]

You didn't even watch the hearing. I'm certain you didn't read the nine hours of testimony. Another Trump dumbfuck poster boy.

And yet somehow I’ve managed to avoid calling names. Grow up.

[NLowrider]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/p ... fight.html

Kavanaugh Was Questioned by Police After Bar Fight in 1985

“On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man’s face,” Mr. Ludington said in the statement. Mr. Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University, said he came forward because he believed Judge Kavanaugh had mischaracterized the extent of his drinking at Yale.”