(October 3, 2018 at 1:04 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(October 3, 2018 at 5:56 am)Joods Wrote: Just because a person has a fear of flying doesn't mean that they won't or can't fly.

I would say a fear of flying would most certainly preclude flying in a single-engine prop plane.

The claim of the second door being a remedy for her claustrophobia is also suspect based on property records, HERE.

And no one can explain why the Washington Post and Democrats have her therapy notes but no one will share them with the Republicans. It leads some to speculate that those notes contain information that could contradict Ford's testimony. Or not. But selectively withholding evidence is at the very least suspicious.

So that's the only thing you got out of my post? Nothing to say about Kavanaugh's transgressions?

Thought so.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:18 pm)Joods Wrote: So that's the only thing you got out of my post? Nothing to say about Kavanaugh's transgressions?

Thought so.

What's there to say?

If a person sticks to the matter of the alleged assault, other transgressions don't matter.

If a person says that testimony can't be trusted if lying is demonstrated on extraneous matters, than they must also discard Ford's claims, and it's case closed.

It's only a person with a double standard that can use Kavanaugh's partying as an issue.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:27 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(October 3, 2018 at 1:18 pm)Joods Wrote: So that's the only thing you got out of my post? Nothing to say about Kavanaugh's transgressions?

Thought so.

What's there to say?

If a person sticks to the matter of the alleged assault, other transgressions don't matter.

If a person says that testimony can't be trusted if lying is demonstrated on extraneous matters, than they must also discard Ford's claims, and it's case closed.

It's only a person with a double standard that can use Kavanaugh's partying as an issue.

Seems to me, that's exactly what you're doing. 

Only a person who has no leg to stand on, would avoid the bulk of what's being addressed. You and Neo can't even respond to all of it. 

What's even scarier is that I'm pretty sure you have daughters. I would think empathy and compassion toward the victim, knowing you have daughters, should be inside you but I guess not. You don't even show one ounce of any of that towards Ford. All I see you saying is what I said in my last post, which you aren't even man enough to reply to.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:27 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(October 3, 2018 at 1:18 pm)Joods Wrote: So that's the only thing you got out of my post? Nothing to say about Kavanaugh's transgressions?

Thought so.

What's there to say?

If a person sticks to the matter of the alleged assault, other transgressions don't matter.

If a person says that testimony can't be trusted if lying is demonstrated on extraneous matters, than they must also discard Ford's claims, and it's case closed.

It's only a person with a double standard that can use Kavanaugh's partying as an issue.

Lets again look at "ye witness testimony" and the level of trust we can put in it.

If someone claims to have witnessed something normally considered impossible than you would demand a higher level of proof than someone claiming to have witnessed a common event.

But in the case of Mrs Ford she didn't witness but experienced an assault, she wasn't only there she was the one who was assaulted.

You are trying to compare apples with a sense of despair. Or oranges with the Yugoslavian navy on manouvers.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:32 pm)Joods Wrote: Seems to me, that's exactly what you're doing. 

How so? I'm not holding extraneous contradictions against either of them. I only bring up Ford's to point out your hypocrisy.

Quote:Only a person who has no leg to stand on, would avoid the bulk of what's being addressed. You and Neo can't even respond to all of it. 

Many times people with no leg to stand on try to introduce irrelevant material. I have no obligation to humor them.

Quote:What's even scarier is that I'm pretty sure you have daughters. I would think empathy and compassion toward the victim, knowing you have daughters, should be inside you but I guess not. You don't even show one ounce of any of that towards Ford. All I see you saying is what I said in my last post, which you aren't even man enough to reply to.

My wife was sexually assaulted as a teenager and has little or no empathy for Ford. Go figure.

I do have empathy for Ford on one issue - I think Feinstein royally fucked her over. This all could have been handled discreetly.

Quote:“The president’s comments were just plain wrong.”

‘Just plain wrong’: Flake, Collins and Murkowski criticize Trump for mocking Kavanaugh accuser at political rally

Kavanaugh's testimony about his drinking and partying is materially relevant because it affects the credibility of his claim to have never blacked out or had partial inability to recall events during his drinking. Ford's polygraph experience, fear of flying, and number of doors in her home, not so much. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus indeed, but this is a little ridiculous. If Kavanaugh lied about his drinking or partying, Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick's testimony is irrelevant as he's not fit to serve on the court at all.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:27 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(October 3, 2018 at 1:18 pm)Joods Wrote: So that's the only thing you got out of my post? Nothing to say about Kavanaugh's transgressions?

Thought so.

What's there to say?

If a person sticks to the matter of the alleged assault, other transgressions don't matter.

If a person says that testimony can't be trusted if lying is demonstrated on extraneous matters, than they must also discard Ford's claims, and it's case closed.

It's only a person with a double standard that can use Kavanaugh's partying as an issue.

Extraneous matters?  Lying to the committee under oath about when he first heard of the second accuser’s allegations is not extraneous.

(October 3, 2018 at 1:54 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

Quote:“The president’s comments were just plain wrong.”

‘Just plain wrong’: Flake, Collins and Murkowski criticize Trump for mocking Kavanaugh accuser at political rally

Kavanaugh's testimony about his drinking and partying is materially relevant because it affects the credibility of his claim to have never blacked out or had partial inability to recall events during his drinking.  Ford's polygraph experience, fear of flying, and number of doors in her home, not so much.  Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus indeed, but this is a little ridiculous.  If Kavanaugh lied about his drinking or partying, Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick's testimony is irrelevant as he's not fit to serve on the court at all.

Would you really have me believe that the FBI, in its previous 6 investigations, did not inquire about the drinking habits of someone entrusted with the nuclear launch codes of the United States?

(October 3, 2018 at 3:56 am)alpha male Wrote:

(October 2, 2018 at 5:03 pm)Joods Wrote: You should care. It goes to credibility.

Quote:Why? Because of her statement about not being able to fly? That has fuck all to do with assault.

I really don't understand how you can contradict yourself like that in a single post and not see it.  

---

Ford's former boyfriend on Ford and polygraphs, fears:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christi...unds-alarm

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...graph.html

Quote:In a written declaration released Tuesday and obtained by Fox News, an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, directly contradicts her testimony under oath last week that she had never helped anyone prepare for a polygraph examination.

The former boyfriend, whose name was redacted in the declaration, also said Ford neither mentioned Kavanaugh nor mentioned she was a victim of sexual misconduct during the time they were dating from about 1992 to 1998. He said he saw Ford going to great lengths to help a woman he believed was her "life-long best friend" prepare for a potential polygraph test. He added that the woman had been interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney's office.

He further claimed that Ford never voiced any fear of flying (even while aboard a propeller plane) and seemingly had no problem living in a "very small," 500 sq. ft. apartment with one door -- apparently contradicting her claims that she could not testify promptly in D.C. because she felt uncomfortable traveling on planes, as well as her suggestion that her memories of Kavanuagh's alleged assault prompted her to feel unsafe living in a closed space or one without a second front door.

Testimony is never so straightforward as that though, is it?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christi...new-claims

(October 3, 2018 at 2:12 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Extraneous matters?  Lying to the committee under oath about when he first heard of the second accuser’s allegations is not extraneous.

I think it is time to put that false story to rest, HERE. NBC selectively presented facts to put forth a false narrative.