Politics Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing, now with New allegations!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Will Kavanaugh be confirmed?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Burn it all down


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Inconsistencies emerge in Kavanaugh accusations, with hearing in doubt
1536176800975.jpg

By Alex Pappas | Fox News
Rep. David Cicilline urges delay on Kavanaugh vote
The FBI should conduct 'thorough investigation' of the sexual assault claim against Brett Kavanaugh before the Senate votes on whether to confirm him to the Supreme Court, says Rep. David Cicilline.

Christine Blasey Ford's allegation that Brett Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her when they were teens has thrown his Supreme Court nomination into doubt. But as senators spar over the terms for a new hearing which may or may not happen, inconsistencies in the story have emerged that could embolden Kavanaugh's defenders.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has given Ford until Friday morning to say whether she will testify next week. Ford first aired her accusations in a Washington Post story over the weekend but has not spoken publicly about them since. Absent another statement or appearance, questions about the account have swirled on Capitol Hill.

"There are an awful lot of questions, inconsistencies, gaps, and that's why to be fair to both, we need to know what happened," Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a key Republican vote, told reporters this week.

Among those are therapist notes from 2012 that Ford gave to the Washington Post to corroborate her claim. Those notes, though, reportedly say four boys – not two, as Ford claims -- were in the room during the alleged incident. Ford told the newspaper this was an error by the therapist.

Ford, who has acknowledged she can’t remember some details from the incident decades ago, has said she was reluctant to come forward and only did so because her hand was forced by the media.

“As you know, earlier this summer, Dr. Ford sought to tell her story, in confidence, so that lawmakers would have a fuller understanding of Brett Kavanaugh’s character and history,” Ford’s attorneys wrote in a letter to the Judiciary Committee this week. “Only after the details of her experience were leaked did Dr. Ford make the reluctant decision to come forward publicly.”

But that claim of reluctance has raised questions about why Ford hired a well-known sexual harassment attorney and took a polygraph test ahead of time if she wasn’t prepared to make the public allegation.


“If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward, never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in August and why did she hire a lawyer in August if she never intended to do what she is doing?” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said on Fox News this week.

Meanwhile, those named by Ford as being present at the party in question in the 1980s have denied the allegations. That includes Kavanaugh, who has emphatically denied the claim, and Mark Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh’s named by Ford who disputes the claims and says he wasn’t at the party in the question.

Another former classmate of Kavanaugh denied having any knowledge of the party or allegations.

"I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Patrick Smyth said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."

Fueling more curiosity was a supposed former classmate of Ford who posted a statement on Facebook this week saying the “incident did happen” and it was “spoken about for days” afterwards “in school.”

But the post came under scrutiny because of Ford’s previous statements that the alleged incident occurred during the summer – and not during the school year – and that she didn’t discuss it with anyone until counseling with a therapist in 2012.

The classmate who posted the statement, Cristina King Miranda, eventually deleted the post on Wednesday, and clarified that, “I do not have firsthand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine.”

She later told NPR: "That it happened or not, I have no idea. I can't say that it did or didn't."

Ford’s legal team, meanwhile, has given differing statements about whether Ford is willing to testify.

During television appearances on Monday, Ford’s attorney Debra Katz indicated her client was willing to testify before the committee under oath.

But later in the week, after the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee invited Ford to testify on Monday in public or private, Ford’s attorneys said she wants the FBI to investigate the claims first – something Republicans reject and the bureau is not at this point expected to do.
 
They post them to their .gov website, which has a share with Facebook function.

Keep fawning ignorance.

That doesn't sound very likely, but if you wish to provide a link, I'd be happy to verify.

Since they've already done a background check on Kavanaugh for this nomination, feel free to just provide a link to his.

barfo
 
Inconsistencies emerge in Kavanaugh accusations, with hearing in doubt
1536176800975.jpg

By Alex Pappas | Fox News
Rep. David Cicilline urges delay on Kavanaugh vote
The FBI should conduct 'thorough investigation' of the sexual assault claim against Brett Kavanaugh before the Senate votes on whether to confirm him to the Supreme Court, says Rep. David Cicilline.

Christine Blasey Ford's allegation that Brett Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her when they were teens has thrown his Supreme Court nomination into doubt. But as senators spar over the terms for a new hearing which may or may not happen, inconsistencies in the story have emerged that could embolden Kavanaugh's defenders.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has given Ford until Friday morning to say whether she will testify next week. Ford first aired her accusations in a Washington Post story over the weekend but has not spoken publicly about them since. Absent another statement or appearance, questions about the account have swirled on Capitol Hill.

"There are an awful lot of questions, inconsistencies, gaps, and that's why to be fair to both, we need to know what happened," Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a key Republican vote, told reporters this week.

Among those are therapist notes from 2012 that Ford gave to the Washington Post to corroborate her claim. Those notes, though, reportedly say four boys – not two, as Ford claims -- were in the room during the alleged incident. Ford told the newspaper this was an error by the therapist.

Ford, who has acknowledged she can’t remember some details from the incident decades ago, has said she was reluctant to come forward and only did so because her hand was forced by the media.

“As you know, earlier this summer, Dr. Ford sought to tell her story, in confidence, so that lawmakers would have a fuller understanding of Brett Kavanaugh’s character and history,” Ford’s attorneys wrote in a letter to the Judiciary Committee this week. “Only after the details of her experience were leaked did Dr. Ford make the reluctant decision to come forward publicly.”

But that claim of reluctance has raised questions about why Ford hired a well-known sexual harassment attorney and took a polygraph test ahead of time if she wasn’t prepared to make the public allegation.


“If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward, never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in August and why did she hire a lawyer in August if she never intended to do what she is doing?” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said on Fox News this week.

Meanwhile, those named by Ford as being present at the party in question in the 1980s have denied the allegations. That includes Kavanaugh, who has emphatically denied the claim, and Mark Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh’s named by Ford who disputes the claims and says he wasn’t at the party in the question.

Another former classmate of Kavanaugh denied having any knowledge of the party or allegations.

"I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Patrick Smyth said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."

Fueling more curiosity was a supposed former classmate of Ford who posted a statement on Facebook this week saying the “incident did happen” and it was “spoken about for days” afterwards “in school.”

But the post came under scrutiny because of Ford’s previous statements that the alleged incident occurred during the summer – and not during the school year – and that she didn’t discuss it with anyone until counseling with a therapist in 2012.

The classmate who posted the statement, Cristina King Miranda, eventually deleted the post on Wednesday, and clarified that, “I do not have firsthand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine.”

She later told NPR: "That it happened or not, I have no idea. I can't say that it did or didn't."

Ford’s legal team, meanwhile, has given differing statements about whether Ford is willing to testify.

During television appearances on Monday, Ford’s attorney Debra Katz indicated her client was willing to testify before the committee under oath.

But later in the week, after the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee invited Ford to testify on Monday in public or private, Ford’s attorneys said she wants the FBI to investigate the claims first – something Republicans reject and the bureau is not at this point expected to do.


...Faux News again?
 
It's ILLEGAL under The Constitution.

The DNC is quite able to hire it's own investigators (I hear James Comey and Andrew McCabe are looking for work) to look into vague and changing allegations produced by political activists when no evidence of any crime is present.

The Federal Justice System is prohibited from doing so, with good reason.

It's illegal?????? ROTFLMAO! Your credibility is shredded the more you post. What makes it illegal? Did they not investigate in the Anita Hill case? Why are the republicans always in a hurry to pass things without going through the full process? They tried it on the affordable care act repeal and failed. What are you afraid of? The truth?
 
Inconsistencies emerge in Kavanaugh accusations, with hearing in doubt
1536176800975.jpg

By Alex Pappas | Fox News
Rep. David Cicilline urges delay on Kavanaugh vote
The FBI should conduct 'thorough investigation' of the sexual assault claim against Brett Kavanaugh before the Senate votes on whether to confirm him to the Supreme Court, says Rep. David Cicilline.

Christine Blasey Ford's allegation that Brett Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her when they were teens has thrown his Supreme Court nomination into doubt. But as senators spar over the terms for a new hearing which may or may not happen, inconsistencies in the story have emerged that could embolden Kavanaugh's defenders.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has given Ford until Friday morning to say whether she will testify next week. Ford first aired her accusations in a Washington Post story over the weekend but has not spoken publicly about them since. Absent another statement or appearance, questions about the account have swirled on Capitol Hill.

"There are an awful lot of questions, inconsistencies, gaps, and that's why to be fair to both, we need to know what happened," Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a key Republican vote, told reporters this week.

Among those are therapist notes from 2012 that Ford gave to the Washington Post to corroborate her claim. Those notes, though, reportedly say four boys – not two, as Ford claims -- were in the room during the alleged incident. Ford told the newspaper this was an error by the therapist.

Ford, who has acknowledged she can’t remember some details from the incident decades ago, has said she was reluctant to come forward and only did so because her hand was forced by the media.

“As you know, earlier this summer, Dr. Ford sought to tell her story, in confidence, so that lawmakers would have a fuller understanding of Brett Kavanaugh’s character and history,” Ford’s attorneys wrote in a letter to the Judiciary Committee this week. “Only after the details of her experience were leaked did Dr. Ford make the reluctant decision to come forward publicly.”

But that claim of reluctance has raised questions about why Ford hired a well-known sexual harassment attorney and took a polygraph test ahead of time if she wasn’t prepared to make the public allegation.


“If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward, never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in August and why did she hire a lawyer in August if she never intended to do what she is doing?” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said on Fox News this week.

Meanwhile, those named by Ford as being present at the party in question in the 1980s have denied the allegations. That includes Kavanaugh, who has emphatically denied the claim, and Mark Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh’s named by Ford who disputes the claims and says he wasn’t at the party in the question.

Another former classmate of Kavanaugh denied having any knowledge of the party or allegations.

"I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Patrick Smyth said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."

Fueling more curiosity was a supposed former classmate of Ford who posted a statement on Facebook this week saying the “incident did happen” and it was “spoken about for days” afterwards “in school.”

But the post came under scrutiny because of Ford’s previous statements that the alleged incident occurred during the summer – and not during the school year – and that she didn’t discuss it with anyone until counseling with a therapist in 2012.

The classmate who posted the statement, Cristina King Miranda, eventually deleted the post on Wednesday, and clarified that, “I do not have firsthand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine.”

She later told NPR: "That it happened or not, I have no idea. I can't say that it did or didn't."

Ford’s legal team, meanwhile, has given differing statements about whether Ford is willing to testify.

During television appearances on Monday, Ford’s attorney Debra Katz indicated her client was willing to testify before the committee under oath.

But later in the week, after the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee invited Ford to testify on Monday in public or private, Ford’s attorneys said she wants the FBI to investigate the claims first – something Republicans reject and the bureau is not at this point expected to do.

FAKE NEWS

She has agreed to testify next week. My question is, why are you leaving her messages threatening her?
 
Annnnnnnnnd...

If a crime occurred the statute of limitations makes the point moot.

Annnnnnnnnd... no:

"I learned this week that there is no statute of limitations for felony sexual assault in Montgomery County, MD."

And in MD:

Third Degree Sexual Assault
– A felony with a sentence not more than 10 years in prison

Third Degree Sexual Assault – includes any of the following:engaging in sexual contact (intentionally touching the victim’s or defendant’s genital, anal, or other private parts for sexual gratification or abuse of either person) in any of the following situations:
Without consent while using a weapon, strangling or seriously injuring the victim, threatening the victim with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with another’s help


Arguably, Kavanaugh could be brought up on charges, if Ford's story can be shown to be factual. I'm quite sure that won't happen, because rich white guy, but..

barfo
 
Annnnnnnnnd... no:

"I learned this week that there is no statute of limitations for felony sexual assault in Montgomery County, MD."

And in MD:



Arguably, Kavanaugh could be brought up on charges, if Ford's story can be shown to be factual. I'm quite sure that won't happen, because rich white guy, but..

barfo


***DESTROYED !***
 
actually, I think I was at that party and what really happened is she forced herself on many guys that night! Im not sure where it was at though.
 
actually, I think I was at that party and what really happened is she forced herself on many guys that night! Im not sure where it was at though.

Do you think it should be investigated by the FBI. They do that quite often. Are you concerned that Kavanaugh is of the mindset a president is above the law?
 
Do you think it should be investigated by the FBI. They do that quite often. Are you concerned that Kavanaugh is of the mindset a president is above the law?
I would guess that to a degree it has been done several times over his career. When you stand back at a glance it looks like an act of political desperation on behalf of the Dems. If it requires and investigation by whoever I'm good with that as long as there is credible reason too. I don't care about Monday but if it appears its being used only to delay the process then that is wrong.
Hell no I don't look at Kavanaugh as the same mindset as Trump. Sure they are both conservative but that suppose to be ok, isn't it?

When Ted Kennedy had his bridge accident I was a democrat and thought he virtually got a way with at the very least, involuntary manslaughter. I knew a guy in high school that was drunk got in a wreck and a young girl was killed. He spend time in jail and ended up with a manslaughter charge.
 
Never go with the victim blaming tact.

It seems amazing to me that women actually still support him. Not that there aren't women who feel that some women make up accusations like this (I'm sure it does happen, but I doubt it happens nearly as much as the right wants to imply)...but seriously, the guy basically endorsed an accused child molester, he himself talks about sexually assaulting women, and now this?
 
You know, person on this planet who I shall not name, I grow weary whenever you call someone "a fine man" ... you've been wrong so many times before.
 
I would guess that to a degree it has been done several times over his career. When you stand back at a glance it looks like an act of political desperation on behalf of the Dems. If it requires and investigation by whoever I'm good with that as long as there is credible reason too. I don't care about Monday but if it appears its being used only to delay the process then that is wrong.
Hell no I don't look at Kavanaugh as the same mindset as Trump. Sure they are both conservative but that suppose to be ok, isn't it?

When Ted Kennedy had his bridge accident I was a democrat and thought he virtually got a way with at the very least, involuntary manslaughter. I knew a guy in high school that was drunk got in a wreck and a young girl was killed. He spend time in jail and ended up with a manslaughter charge.

You misunderstood part of my post. My mindset comment wasn't comparing Trump and Kavanaugh although there seems to be more similarities than not, but instead was a reference that Kavanaugh believes a president shouldn't be indicted or investigated if they commit a crime. In other words, he feels a president is above the law. A dangerous mindset considering the type of person Trump is.
 
You misunderstood part of my post. My mindset comment wasn't comparing Trump and Kavanaugh although there seems to be more similarities than not, but instead was a reference that Kavanaugh believes a president shouldn't be indicted or investigated if they commit a crime. In other words, he feels a president is above the law. A dangerous mindset considering the type of person Trump is.
If I was to hear him actually say that in the right context, sure it would bother me. The problem is so much of what is said anymore that come's from partisan politicians and/or media spinning in out of context.
If I hear trump on tape making crude remarks about ladies (I still call them ladies) I know he said it and the context he said it in. Guilty
When I heard Clinton on tape tell Wall Streeter's she advocates open boarder society, I know she said it and ten context she said it in. Guilty

Politicians have always said one thing and done other things to appease their base.
I don't think there are that many similarities at all between Trump and Kavanaugh but maybe there is. I know they both are conservatives at least Kavanaugh seems to be.
If Clinton was our President she would be entitled to nominate whomever she liked. Im good with that.

This deal with Kav in all honesty to me looks like a very desperate play on the democrats. Id say the same thing if the roles were reversed.
 
Last edited:
So let's see if I'm understanding this correctly, she was assaulted, but it wasn't Kavanaugh but someone who looked like him?

Whatever degenerative brain disease Trump has, apparently it is highly contagious and every Republican has caught it.

barfo
 
Whatever degenerative brain disease Trump has, apparently it is highly contagious and every Republican has caught it.

barfo
I have friends that are republicans and I would never accuse them of having a brain disease. I have friends that are democrats and I don't see no brain disease in them. WOW
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top