America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by Mr. Jones. 994 replies replies.
20 Pages<123456789>»
Kavanaghs N.E.W. "prob-lame-ohhh"...a drunkin' stupor double teaming forced dry hump
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
delta1 Offline
#51 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 6:25 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
MACS wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty. Does anyone else find it odd that the dems assume he's guilty of this merely because it was alleged?

How many decades ago? So there is NO WAY to prove the veracity of the claim, or his innocence?

It's complete and utter bullshit. Period. End of story.


that was the norm when Clarence Thomas was going through his confirmation to SCOTUS and the Anita Hill allegations popped up. He was confirmed, by a close margin.

I do not know who is telling the truth: she says, he says. Let them have their say in public, so that we can evaluate their credibility. But since this is a partisan political event, I'm sure cons will line up behind the judge and libs will lean towards the Professor, regardless.

Recent events where powerful men have been brought down by allegations of sexual misconduct, some that were decades old, may have changed the dynamics. Women hold more prominent roles in society and although coming forward is still a traumatic experience, they are being encouraged to do so and supported. There will likely be more examples of this into the future, until men stop abusive behaviors.
DrafterX Offline
#52 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 7:39 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
Just men are abusive..?? I heard women smack Jade around all the time... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#53 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 7:58 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
he likes it and consents...
ZRX1200 Offline
#54 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 8:05 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
Yes, more examples of political leveraging a victim group, that's so new for democrats.
MACS Offline
#55 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 8:41 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/18/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-demands-full-investigation-by-fbi-before-testifying-in-letter-from-her-lawyers.html

She wants a full FBI investigation before she testifies? Is it now clear that this is a delaying tactic? WTF are they gonna find from a 40 year old case that she can't remember half of, anyway? Or that they didn't find in 6 previous background investigations.
frankj1 Offline
#56 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:31 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
perhaps they will find nothing.
teedubbya Offline
#57 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:44 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Amazing how some things deserve investigation and others do not. The most important thing is to act quickly here rather than investigate. We can not let a SCOTUS seat set empty for any amount of time because that’s bad and stuff.

Investigate. Then decide. Don’t decide first.
frankj1 Offline
#58 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:49 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
and it's only a life time appointment
teedubbya Offline
#59 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:50 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I have no clue what the truth is here. I’m amazed at the people that do.
teedubbya Offline
#60 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:51 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Of course those that know the truth in no way have been influenced by their echo chamber of choice.
frankj1 Offline
#61 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:52 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
I dunno either.
I always figured that's why we go through deliberate processes.
Gene363 Offline
#62 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:53 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,799
teedubbya wrote:
Amazing how some things deserve investigation and others do not. The most important thing is to act quickly here rather than investigate. We can not let a SCOTUS seat set empty for any amount of time because that’s bad and stuff.

Investigate. Then decide. Don’t decide first.


Unless it's a vote on healthcare.
teedubbya Offline
#63 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:53 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Which was wrong Gene.
teedubbya Offline
#64 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:54 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And the way they did it has consequences even today. Is that a reason to do similar or worse?
teedubbya Offline
#65 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:55 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
This is a potential trap for republicans that could harm them for decades although the trade off might be worth it for some.
teedubbya Offline
#66 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
This could also replace Grassley’s long forgotten golden hammer legacy.
Mr. Jones Offline
#67 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 10:02 PM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,419
I am KARNAK...
&

I SAY THE BEOTCH is "sketchy @ BEST"...

AND HAS SEVERAL NEW FULL OF CASH SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES...in her children's names who are underage and can't be traced or information released easily...that female lawyer set up the entire payoff scheme and kids name idea to stop investigators...

ONLY a niave fool would think otherwise.

True or NOT?

THE BROAD WAS PAID OFF BY DNC OPERATIVES WITH GEORGE SOROS MONIES....& POSSIBLY BLOOMBERG IS INVOLVED SOMEHOW...THAT SLIMY BASTID PLAYS BOTH SIDES ON EVERY WIERD OCCURANCE ( but he's always anonymous and in the shadows...like US oil companies helping the Nazis...or the Vatican helping NAZI's escape to south America in the late 1940's...)
teedubbya Offline
#68 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 10:03 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I blame Yogi and Steve aka boo boo
MACS Offline
#69 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 10:25 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
Can always count on teedub swallowing the waffle cone.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... it's a duck. You libs want the delay because it benefits you. You refuse to take this at face value? Doesn't the whole damn thing smell fishy to you? It does to me, and in my line of work my instincts are usually pretty damn accurate. I dare say 98.2% accurate.
teedubbya Offline
#70 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 10:48 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I gain or lose nothing based on delay. The fact you see it that way means it’s more a game to you than it is to me.

Investigate. If it’s a duck that will shine through.

I always thought jailers were neither judge or jury. I’d hate to have you deciding such things on the limited information we have based on your instincts.

I want to hear more. I want more information. If nothing shows up to sway.... confirm. An investigation could turn up things like his presence at the party etc. which have been flat out denied. Or it may not.

The need to rush is a part of the game you accuse others of.

By the way I lean waaaaay towards the side of the President in power choosing someone of their political liking and disagreement with their politics being irrelevant and not a reason to oppose. Elections have consequences.

Assuming there is nothing here, and an investigation is done I’d confirm him. Prior to the allegation I’d have confirmed him. It has nothing to do with my politics or if I like him. I don’t really approach this as a lib or con like you do.

Investigate then confirm him if nothing substantial turns up. If the investigation shows the whole thing is a farce and nothing but delay press charges. Likely it will be neither and he’ll get confirmed. But investigate. What are you scared of?
victor809 Offline
#71 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 11:17 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
MACS must have a really poor opinion of conservatives.

According to his post...
Liberals = wanting to investigate to determine what happened as best you can before making decisions.
Conservatives= just making a random decision based on your "gut"

Sounds like he thinks conservatives are a bunch of emotional people who don't make decisions based on actual information.

TW.... I'm sorry you're being called a liberal. I still remember when you and I used to disagree on politics.... It's a sign of how f-ed up things have become that you're now just lumped with anyone trumpers disagree with simply because you aren't willing to agree lock step with everything they want.
MACS Offline
#72 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 11:20 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
I'm not afraid of anything. Are you telling me that you don't find the timing of this whole thing curious? Feinstein has the info for months and says nothing? Woman wants to be anonymous... why? Then changes her mind? Why? Gets a lawyer? Why? Now she won't say a word until her allegations are investigated by the FBI? Why?

November is right around the corner. Dems are stalling in hopes of gaining ground so he won't be confirmed. If that's not obvious to you... you're being obtuse.
MACS Offline
#73 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 11:21 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
And here comes Mr. knowitall... extrapolating to fit his own agenda.
victor809 Offline
#74 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 11:25 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
.... Umm MACS...
Let's pretend we know for a fact that both things are true. We know for a fact that kavaunagh sexually assaulted her as a drunken high schooler.... AND she intentionally waited until a politically expedient time to come forward....

Does that really make a difference ?

I mean... If you knew for a fact that he did this, would it really matter to you when the victim chose to tell you?

It shouldn't.... So investigate to find out what we can...
teedubbya Offline
#75 Posted: Tue, Sep 18 2018, 11:45 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Who said I don’t find anything curious or fishy? Reread instead of project. I never said that.

Investigate. That’s why we investigate. I think an investigation can show many things. If she’s making it all up it can show that and we should punish her and confirm him. If she’s not lying the dude shouldn’t get confirmed based on his denial as much as the incident. We shouldn’t want him in a lifetime position of that magnitude if that’s the case. If it’s inconclusive confirm him.

A good investigator can shake the tree pretty well. A nonpartisan investigator is needed. Non partisan doesn’t mean the folks can’t have opinions, it just means it shouldn’t impact their official actions. If you are one of the conspiracy minded folks that thinks that not possible (not saying you are) then you can’t really call yourself conservative or republican. Regardless of the current WH media campaign the fbi and law enforcement are conservative. I think you know that.

Two of the three scenarios lead to his confirmation and rightly so. The third is very important if you are at all serious. If not, and this is just a game to you carry on.

It’s sad when investigate becomes a dirty word.
DrafterX Offline
#76 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 7:06 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
TW..!! Laugh
dstieger Offline
#77 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 8:11 AM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
MACS wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/18/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-demands-full-investigation-by-fbi-before-testifying-in-letter-from-her-lawyers.html

She wants a full FBI investigation before she testifies? Is it now clear that this is a delaying tactic? WTF are they gonna find from a 40 year old case that she can't remember half of, anyway? Or that they didn't find in 6 previous background investigations.


Yep.

My offer of 100% benefit of the doubt to Ms. Ford is slipping fast.

May not be her, even. Nothing that has come out of her lawyer's mouth says this is about 'the incident' or 'fairness'.

MACS Offline
#78 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 8:29 AM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
teedubbya wrote:
...A good investigator can shake the tree pretty well. A nonpartisan investigator is needed. Non partisan doesn’t mean the folks can’t have opinions, it just means it shouldn’t impact their official actions...


Did this not happen SIX TIMES already when the FBI did his background check?

I was already in the military for 15+ years when I had to get a background check for a secret clearance (not top secret, mind you... just secret) and I got investigated pretty damn thoroughly. I think if the guy had anything to find it would have been found.
ZRX1200 Offline
#79 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 9:07 AM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
Don't take away tdubs "reason" argument, he will pivot. He always pivots.
DrafterX Offline
#80 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 9:32 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
TW is Kobe Bryant..?? Huh
dstieger Offline
#81 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 9:38 AM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Mostly unrelated to Kavanaugh and Ford, but I applaud whoever has been able to control the Tweeter in Chief this week. Sure, some media will find ways to attack what little he's said thus far, but I, for one, am impressed that someone (Conway, maybe?) has been able to keep him in a pretty safe box so far
Mr. Jones Offline
#82 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 9:41 AM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,419
The broad is a LIAR...

HOPPING ON THE #METOO BANDWAGON.

SHE HAS PSYCOLOGICAL PROBLEMS AND MARITAL COUNSELING BROUGHT THAT TO THE FOREFRONT.

Now, conjecture by KARNAK:

My "guess" is , her hubby was banging her graduate assistant because she wasn't taking care of his needs and she ASKED FOR MARITAL COUNCILING...

The psycologist HIP-NO-TIZED HER "3-4" OUT OF 10 SCALE sorry azz MUG and she saw "FOUR" BOYS DRY HUMPING HER IN A HAZE OF DOUBT...LIKE A SCAREY DREAM....

ALL OF A SUDDEN...

THIS BECOMES "TOTALLY TRUE" IN HER MIND and Mr. Kavanuagh is one of the four SCAREY DREAM BOYS....
Then horny hubby sees a MASSIVE PAYDAY AROUND THE BEND AND PUSHES WIFEY TO WRITE A LETTER TO A CONGRESS LADY...congress lady and hubby collude and conspire then decide to hire a #METOO lawyer known to George Soros....
SOROS CREAMS HIS PANTS AT SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY TO F**K WITH THE REPUBLICANS and grind the U.S. govt. To a halt...soros PULLS $2 MILLION IN CASH OUT OF HIS SOCK DRAWER...GIVES IT TO A
WELL SEASONED D.N.C. OPERATIVE ( whom I may know ?who is over 60 yrs old) who takes the redeye from NYC TO CALI...OPERATIVE & LAWYER MEET...MONEY EXCHANGED, hubby goes to lawyers office with kids in tow then drives all around CALI...opening up safe deposit boxes in kids names, pays box rental in cash till 2050 on all of them...

The rest is history and TOTAL B.S. LIES....
Speyside Offline
#83 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 11:46 AM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I think a detailed investigation is called for. If he did this he is not SCOTUS material. On the other hand if he did not his reputation should be restored.
victor809 Offline
#84 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 11:53 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Now a woman who went to Dr Ford's school and peripherally knew all involved is saying it happened and people at the school had heard about it.
victor809 Offline
#85 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 11:55 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
... correction. A woman who claims to have gone to Dr Ford's school. I haven't got the time to confirm that right now.
DrafterX Offline
#86 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:08 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
Then it's fake news...Shame on you
bgz Offline
#87 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:09 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
It's tough to believe her when there's no body to corroborate her story.

The people she's named denied the incident happened (at least that I've seen) and say Kavanaugh is a stand up guy.

That, and this incident was decades ago, and no claim of an actual rape occurred.

On top of that, she wasn't hot... I would think a rich kid from a prep school would at least pick a hot chick to dry hump on if he was drunk. I mean, it was supposedly a giant party with tons of chicks... why pick the weird looking one?

Also, if the party was such a rager, then you know she was drinking too, so how can you going trust that she remembers everything from a drunken night 30 years ago...

And the timing of it all along with the accuser being a die hard leftist...

You can say wait and see her testimony as to determine if what she is saying is credible, but she's a trained psychologist who could hard sell testimony with a little practice.

Speaking of practice, she won't testify until there's an investigation... investigate what, it was 30 years ago... but it will buy time to work on her pitch.

I'm with MACS, this whole thing just smells fishy AF.
victor809 Offline
#88 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:24 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
A lot of those are weak reasons bgz...
No claim of actual rape... That doesn't really impact credibility. If she were making sh$t up for political reasons why wouldn't she go all in. It was 30 years ago .. proving or disproving actual rape would be just as hard as proving or disproving sexual assault.

She's ugly... (I never checked) ... Not really relevant. If I recall attractiveness isnt always a driver on these assaults. She wasn't from their school. She likely had less social connections and probably seemed an easier victim... An attractive girl from a connected family would have consequences... If you did a little research you'd find that attractiveness isn't necessarily linked to sexual assault.

"You know she was drinking"?.... In college I was at plenty of parties where there were people who only drank a couple. Or didn't drink... Again this is a piss poor argument not to investigate.
dstieger Offline
#89 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:25 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
May be that nobody is lying...yet
I still think its possible, if not likely, that she's wrong, but not lying. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Judge WAS in the room, but the guy she's now remembering as Kavanaugh was actually someone else.
DrafterX Offline
#90 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:29 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
I heard it was Jade... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#91 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:31 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
If you've decided she's lying, then this all looks suspicious.

If you are open to the possibility that she's telling the truth, this should be looked into by FBI back-ground investigators and then an open hearing scheduled to ensure that all witnesses who have knowledge of the allegations can be subjected to sworn testimony.

Feinstein made a mistake by trying to honor the woman's request to remain anonymous. She should have handed the letter over to the FBI when she first got it a at the end of July/beginning of August. The woman first wrote a letter to her Congresswoman back when the Kavanaugh's nomination was announced. That Congresswoman should have forwarded the letter to the FBI so that it could be handled during the vetting background check.

Cons would be insisting on all of this if it was a Dem President's nominee....no, they would not be allowing a Dem President to nominate a SCOTUS...
DrafterX Offline
#92 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:37 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
Should be handled by the state... And being California I'm surprised it's not... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#93 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:38 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
some events in life are indelibly etched in our minds, especially if those events don't happen very frequently...

I remember the names and faces of every person I physically fought with, 50 or more years ago...and had intimate contact with 45 or more years ago...and if any of their names came up today, I would remember my experience with them...
ZRX1200 Offline
#94 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:40 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
After the grandstanding didn't work.

And the "lawyer" is the vice chair of a group opposing Kavanaugh.
delta1 Offline
#95 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:42 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
DrafterX wrote:
Should be handled by the state... And being California I'm surprised it's not... Mellow


no, this is not a criminal investigation...

this should be part of a background investigation...Kavanaugh is a nominee to the SCOTUS and requires/demands an extensive background check into his character, integrity and fitness for the position...
victor809 Offline
#96 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
.... Ok... While I agree with you on most things Delta... Gonna have to disagree on that.
I couldn't remember the face of anyone I've gotten in a fight with... They're random people...
As for screwing?... I don't think I knew names some times or remembered them.... Faces? Not a chance. I could probably remember the ones I saw more than twice.... But that's still hit or miss...
ZRX1200 Offline
#97 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:42 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
Senators grandstanding (to be clear)
delta1 Offline
#98 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:50 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
victor809 wrote:
.... Ok... While I agree with you on most things Delta... Gonna have to disagree on that.
I couldn't remember the face of anyone I've gotten in a fight with... They're random people...
As for screwing?... I don't think I knew names some times or remembered them.... Faces? Not a chance. I could probably remember the ones I saw more than twice.... But that's still hit or miss...


maybe the number of fights and the circumstances in your experience differs from mine...

I've been in four fights, all in grade school...I've had a few physical altercations when making an arrest and don't remember some names and faces, but they weren't personal, like the fights were ...

and your experience with women is much different from mine...

so maybe your point could be legitimate, but unless Dr. Ford was groped and restrained in a sexual manner on many occasions, I think her memory would be crystal clear...if it happened...
victor809 Offline
#99 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:51 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Of course the senators are going to grandstand.

Don't let the noise (on both sides) distract.

A man is being assessed for his fitness to be the highest judge in the land for life.

In the process of that assessment a woman has accused him of some questionable behavior in his youth.

He has denied ever being at the party where this questionable behavior is claimed to have occurred.

Now we find out what we can. If she turns out to be credible, then we assess whether a man who did this action and then lied about it should be judge. If she turns out to be non-credible then we agree with him and move on.

What the senators are saying on either side is just noise.
(Caveat... The senators will actually make the decision. So you decide later when you vote whether you think they made a decision you agreed with)
victor809 Offline
#100 Posted: Wed, Sep 19 2018, 12:54 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Don't get me wrong Delta... I think her memory (if her accusation is true) is reasonably accurate. Simply because this would have been someone she knew. My understanding (could be incorrect) is that they knew each other before hand or travelled in overlapping social circles.... At a time in one's life when you remember people in social circles....
Users browsing this topic
Guest
20 Pages<123456789>»
Back to Top