Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Myles

Will Kavanaugh get the nod?

Will Kavanaugh be confirmed?  

38 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Will Kavanaugh get enough YES votes?

    • Yes
      32
    • No
      6

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 10/02/2018 at 07:32 PM

1,185 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

ExpandMyMind
1 minute ago, Agent0range said:

Have both families not been getting death threats?  I'd be more p***ed if your husband put someone through an attempted sexual assault.  I mean, it's pretty clear he was a heavy drinker and partier throughout his teen years.  He even claimed, falsely, that he was drinking legally in Maryland at the time.  He asked a Senator if she ever blacked out while drinking and couldn't remember what she had done...I don't believe him.

Ford received death threats, then a bit later Kavanaugh claimed his daughters received them. I can't see the logic in sending his daughters threats. I mean him, you can see it, but innocent daughters? That sounds like an attempt to neutralise the political spin from the first death threats.

I'm not sure if I can quite believe that one. If you buy into the whole 'Dems are the most evil thing since Hitler' thing, then I guess I can see it. But otherwise it seems rather political.

Ford moved house and hired security after hers. What evidence exists that Kavanaugh's claim is true?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman
9 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Eh, the journalist from the outlet she contacted is just parroting her? You don't think said journalist would be in the perfect position to verify when her own newspaper was contacted? Contact that initiated her writing her story? I mean, whaaat?

Of course the WP would know when they were contacted. 

Quote

In a statement to investigators, which Rachel Mitchell, special counsel for the Republicans, referred to during the hearing, Ford claims that on July 6, she “had a sense of urgency to relay the information [of the assault] to the Senate and the president.” When asked if she had made any attempts to reach them on that date, Ford replied that she didn’t know how. At that point, Kavanaugh had not been named as the nominee, but he was on President Trump’s shortlist.

After weighing her options, Ford says that she decided to pursue her “civic duty” and called the office of her congresswoman, California Rep. Anna Eshoo. Ford also said that she put in an anonymous tip to the Washington Post. Neither the paper nor the congresswoman got back to her before Kavanaugh’s nomination was made public. - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh-hearing-explanation-timing.html

So it's her word. And no date is given. She said she "didn't know how". Ok so when was the date? She only had 3 days at most and "didn't know how" so when did the "anonymous" tip come in? 

Edit: Oh and by the way is she psychic? She intuitively knew Kavanaugh would be nominated 72 hours before it happened? 

Edited by lost_shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
13 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Have both families not been getting death threats? 

Captain Risky and I were only speaking about the wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
2 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

So it's her word. And no date is given. She said she "didn't know how". Ok so when was the date? She only had 3 days at most and "didn't know how" so when did the "anonymous" tip come in? 

I'm not really sure how much clearer it can be made. The words from the article really state everything explicitly.

Quote

She contacted The Post through a tip line in early July, when it had become clear that Kavanaugh was on the shortlist of possible nominees to replace retiring justice Anthony M. Kennedy but before Trump announced his name publicly.

'Contacted the Post'; 'before Trump announced his name publicly'.

Which part is confusing you? The part where the WP said they were contacted by her, known to them presumably because they exist as human beings and are able to recognise being contacted? Or the part where they said it happened before he was nominated? 

It seems fairly clear to me that it is more than her word. In a process that involves two parties with both parties having confirmed the same information, it becomes verified. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
14 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

So it's her word. And no date is given. She said she "didn't know how". Ok so when was the date? She only had 3 days at most and "didn't know how" so when did the "anonymous" tip come in? 

Edit: Oh and by the way is she psychic? She intuitively knew Kavanaugh would be nominated 72 hours before it happened? 

So, you are saying she made up the story and took a shot in the dark and picked a name off of the short list?  Got it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skliss
2 hours ago, Agent0range said:

I don't remember saying she ordered the senate to do anything, she requested it.  If I did say she ordered the Senate to do anything, quote me, and I will go back and edit my statement.

Actually this could have been handled in house, quietly, the way these things are usually investigated. Ford said she gave the letter to 3 people, her congresswoman, her lawyer (recommended by Feinstein) and Finstein. The reason it became public was because at the 11th hour one of those 3 leaked it to the media.  After that they offered to go to her and get her statement in CA, in private or any other accommodation she required and because she claimed a fear of flying...which they dispelled showing she flies for business and pleasure (Tahiti) all the time. Meanwhile her lawyers flew her secretly to Delaware in preparation for this very public meeting...which she agreed to. The Dems wanted it public the whole time because they didn't expect Kavanaugh to fight back. They thought he'd deny, but drop out even though he's innocent but they mistook their man. They also didn't expect for him to have kept detailed records of his doings in those years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman
12 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

So, you are saying she made up the story and took a shot in the dark and picked a name off of the short list?  Got it.

No she obviously knew Kavenaugh's freind Mark Judge. Did she now anyone else's friend on Trump's short list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skliss
1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

Kavanaugh made a more forceful and louder speech not a more compelling one. which under the circumstances speaks volumes. Mrs Kavanaugh didn't look very supportive or impressed of her husbands plea's of innocence.  i think they should have asked Mrs Kavanaugh what she thought...

I found it compelling, i teared up at least 3 times. Mrs Kavanaugh too. Why don't you go ahead and ask her how she feels about her little girls getting death threats or having the man she loves accused of gang raping women....yeah, I'd be giving those a$$hats dirty looks too.

P.S. there were also news reports that Alyssa Milano, who hates Kavanaugh was also tearing up during his opening.

Edited by skliss
Added
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Harry
25 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

So, you are saying she made up the story and took a shot in the dark and picked a name off of the short list?  Got it.

I doubt the woman was ever assaulted. She is likely a paid pawn of the Democratic Party. Her purpose simply to derail Judge Kavanaugh's nomination.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Truman show
8 minutes ago, skliss said:

I found it compelling, i teared up at least 3 times. Mrs Kavanaugh too. Why don't you go ahead and ask her how she feels about her little girls getting death threats or having the man she loves accused of gang raping women....yeah, I'd be giving those a$$hats dirty looks too.

any time family gets involved in these things i don't like it one bit, either. the fact that you teared up isn't proof that Kavanaugh is telling the truth, but testament to your good nature and values. i find the death threats deplorable and those responsible should be charged. and if that was the reason that Mrs Kavanaugh looked angry and upset then she has my sympathies. i wish i can say that it will get better for her and her little girls from here on in but it won't. some how i don't think it will. her husband has chosen a high profile and politized job. 

Edited by Captain Risky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lost_shaman

The accusation is the Ford came forward before Kavanaugh's nomination. But that's not true. CNBC reported that President Trump had settled on Kavanaugh on July 5th! 

Quote

That source, along with another person familiar with the negotiations, said the president gave strong indications that he prefers D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Vice President Mike Pence, meanwhile, would throw his backing behind whoever the president nominates, a source said. - CNBC on July 5th.

So Christine Blasey Ford did not come forward before Kavanagh was publicly being named as the President's nominee! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gertdoggy
1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

In the part I quoted.

This is what you quoted "She contacted The Post through a tip line in early July, when it had become clear that Kavanaugh was on the shortlist of possible nominees to replace retiring justice Anthony M. Kennedy but before Trump announced his name publicly. A registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations, she contacted her congresswoman, Democrat Anna G. Eshoo, around the same time."

 

There is no date there, where again are you coming up with a date prior to the 9th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skliss
Just now, Captain Risky said:

 mate any time family gets involved in these things i don't like it one bit, either. the fact that you teared up isn't proof that Kavanaugh is telling the truth, but testament to your good nature and values. i find the death threats deplorable and those responsible should be charged. and if that was the reason that Mrs Kavanaugh looked angry and upset then she has my sympathies. i wish i can say that it will get better for her and her little girls from here on in but i some how don;t it will now that her husband has chosen such a high profile and politized job. 

And if everytime good people, see what they could be accused of for accepting an important job position no matter how exemplary a life they've lead, no one will apply. There is real danger in using these kinds of tactics to get your way. The backfire potential is unprecedented! Some feel the ends justify the means but that kind of thinking always results in consequences. Take a moment and imagine he's innocent...then put yourself in his shoes. IMO Ford is just mistaken in who it was...She needs counselling, not the circus she was thrown into.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
6 minutes ago, Lord Harry said:

I doubt the woman was ever assaulted. She is likely a paid pawn of the Democratic Party. Her purpose simply to derail Judge Kavanaugh's nomination.

Well, you can believe whatever your little heart desires.  That's your right.  I find it hard to believe anything without proof..and yes, I consider a polygraph proof. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Truman show

@skliss thats possible. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skliss
Just now, Agent0range said:

Well, you can believe whatever your little heart desires.  That's your right.  I find it hard to believe anything without proof..and yes, I consider a polygraph proof. 

But not one administered by her lawyer that asked only two questions.  A neutral  professional polygrapher (is that a word) Would have been more believable. But there is a reason they are not admissible in court..because they aren't reliable. Even if it wasn't him and she convinced herself it was....Then it would come out as truthful.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
Just now, skliss said:

But not one administered by her lawyer that asked only two questions.  A neutral  professional polygrapher (is that a word) Would have been more believable. But there is a reason they are not admissible in court..because they aren't reliable. Even if it wasn't him and she convinced herself it was....Then it would come out as truthful.

So let him take one.  People can talk down polygraphs all they want, but when it comes to government trust, it is the go to.  To give an 18 year old kid access to the nations secrets with a TS/SCI clearance, it takes a polygraph.  The only difference between a secret clearance and a TS clearance is a polygraph test, and 3 years further back on the check.  So, the government does place a very high weight on the polygraph.  The fact that you won't submit to a polygraph, and did not want an FBI investigation, as Kavanaugh stated, is very telling in itself.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gertdoggy

I am still on the fence with this overall so I am not asking this as an honest question that I don't have an answer too. Why didn’t Fords parents or brother sign her character reference? I could not find any reliable answer to that. Maybe they are die hard Republicans and that is more important to them but it seems odd to me. Does anyone know anything about the family relationship prior to this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

Kavanaugh made a more forceful and louder speech not a more compelling one. which under the circumstances speaks volumes.

He was more assertive *AND* more compelling.  Yes, it spoke volumes.

Mrs Kavanaugh didn't look very supportive or impressed of her husbands plea's of innocence.  i think they should have asked Mrs Kavanaugh what she thought...

I listened to the hearings before watching it.  When he nearly faltered I was envisioning reaching out to support him.  I knew I was not the only one.  When I was able to watch it and I saw Ashley right behind him, I was thinking "OMG!"  Every ounce of strength she could muster was there in support of Brett.  I wouldn't have dared go up to her to ask what she thought and expect to walk away with all my body parts still in their proper places.

 

The bottom line is still that Ford was unable to corroborate her accusation.  That doesn't mean that Kavanaugh "is still a gang rapest".  It means that the Progs are callous and don't care about who they hurt or destroy (referring to both Ford and Kavanaugh).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
12 minutes ago, Gertdoggy said:

I am still on the fence with this overall so I am not asking this as an honest question that I don't have an answer too. Why didn’t Fords parents or brother sign her character reference? I could not find any reliable answer to that. Maybe they are die hard Republicans and that is more important to them but it seems odd to me. Does anyone know anything about the family relationship prior to this.

I don't know the specifics, but I do know in my 6 different federal background investigations, immediate family could not be included in my character references for the obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Truman show
1 minute ago, RavenHawk said:

He was more assertive *AND* more compelling.  Yes, it spoke volumes.

 

 

I listened to the hearings before watching it.  When he nearly faltered I was envisioning reaching out to support him.  I knew I was not the only one.  When I was able to watch it and I saw Ashley right behind him, I was thinking "OMG!"  Every ounce of strength she could muster was there in support of Brett.  I wouldn't have dared go up to her to ask what she thought and expect to walk away with all my body parts still in their proper places.

 

The bottom line is still that Ford was unable to corroborate her accusation.  That doesn't mean that Kavanaugh "is still a gang rapest".  It means that the Progs are callous and don't care about who they hurt or destroy (referring to both Ford and Kavanaugh).

well i can't honestly say that i wasn't effected to the same degree as you were, but as a bloke i sorta felt sorry for Karanaugih's predicament but more importantly for the only people that aren't lying and deserve a better go... his family and kids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
5 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

He was more assertive *AND* more compelling.  Yes, it spoke volumes.

But the drunken party wasn't on my calendar!  How compelling.  He also said he was drinking legally in Maryland at that time.  Which is false.  Care to take up that lie?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor Witness
10 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I’m leaning yes too.  If I believe what is happening is happening then I need to put my trust into fate and make it an emphatic YES!

 

Kavanaugh made a more compelling speech than Ford but the minions of evil are in play.

 

“Minions,” you mean millions?

Kavanaugh lost me whenever he bragged about his prolonged state of virginity, as proof of his virtue. That was his Anita Hill pube on the coke can moment. Congratulations Bret ... you just lost the men too.

Come on man, no woman would put out for you, because you could only get up the nerve when you were drunk? Maybe the nerve in his proboscis was saying “no,” and the women knew it, which is probably why Senator Graham flamed out like a queen, revealing that her only talent is in her mouth. Maybe they could help One another’s sexual frustrations?

 

 

 

 

Edited by Raptor Witness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
14 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

But the drunken party wasn't on my calendar!  How compelling.  He also said he was drinking legally in Maryland at that time.  Which is false.  Care to take up that lie?

Since those that Ford claimed were at 'this' drunken party has denied being there, then the question would have to be 'what party?'  You need to look at the calendar a bit more closely and transport yourself back then.  Now, I'll admit that I may have misunderstood what the law was.  It is my understanding that if you were underage, you could not purchase liquor.  It didn't mean that they can't drink.  It is evidently obvious that drinking amongst teens in that area in that time was a common occurance, legal or not.  So it's not much of a lie where a teen and beer are concerned.

 

There are two other things that need to be considered.  When Brett did drink, he was always under control.  I know people like that.  The other thing is that they lived in a small community, if there was a gang rapist among them, it would be known who it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
2 minutes ago, Raptor Witness said:

“Minions,” you mean millions?

 

 

It could be millions of minions...but I was right the first time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.