(October 3, 2018 at 6:58 am)alpha male Wrote: It's a sworn statement and the full statement is shown in the second link. You don't need to rely on Fox's article.
Then why the link from Fox? Oh that's right - because it's every trump lover's go to. A sworn statement is not the same as testimony. Let's bring all of these people to a hearing where they can all testify - for both sides.
Joods Wrote:Second - you clearly don't understand what a fear does or doesn't have exclusivity on. Just because a person has a fear of flying doesn't mean that they won't or can't fly. But keep misrepresenting this. You're doing a fine job.
AM Wrote:What do you think of the point that Ford counseled a friend regarding polygraphs but then denied repeatedly in the hearings that she had ever done so?
What does that even have to do with my second point? Nice strawman. But let's appease you and talk about it. I have no idea what her point was, to be honest. Do you have information that specifically points to her reasons? If so, I'd like to see that.
Joods Wrote:Third - an ex boyfriend who wasn't present at that party/gathering was the best you could do while completely ignoring others stepping forward who have first hand knowledge of Kavanaugh's drinking and partying, comes as no surprise to me.
AM Wrote:Those others weren't at that party/gathering either. Why the differing standards?
It isn't differing standards and it's about being at more than one party. It's relevant because it shows that he lied about his drinking. Kavanaugh made statements several times while testifying that he likes beer, that he likes drinking with his friends and that he still likes beer. But he downplayed how much he drank and he lied about not ever blacking out at parties when there have been witnesses coming forward saying the opposite.
Why is it okay for you to make sure that an irrelevant polygraph test is allowed to be scrutinized, but other parties that Kavanaugh attended and lied about, aren't?
This goes to the scope of his credibility in the fact that he was not forthcoming and honest about his level of partying. Lying about anything, while under oath, to the SJC, is grounds for having your nomination terminated. Even Senator Flake has now said that if Kavanaugh has lied about his drinking, he will not vote yes. This alone speaks mounds. And let's not forget: Ford is not seeking a lifetime appointment to a seat on the highest judicial bench in this country. Kavanaugh is.
AM Wrote: If extraneous info is relevant for one party, it's relevant for both. Or you're just admitting that you have no concern for fairness.
Let's talk about fairness.
The republicans sitting on the Senate Judicial Committee denied the democrats of that same committee, the right to timely review 94% of Kavanaugh's papers. Ninety Four Percent.
The republicans attempted to rush through a vote in order to get it to the main floor of the Senate as soon as they found out about the accusations leveled by Ford.
Graham, Flake, Grassley and other republicans have made speeches to reporters and others, essentially sending out the message that women don't matter and that what happens to them doesn't matter and that they will hurry up and rush this nominee's vote through no matter what they have to do.
Mitchell (I believe that's her last name), the "special lawyer" the republicans brought in to question Ford, didn't bother questioning Kavanaugh while he was testifying.
Days after Trump praised Ford for her credible testimony, he was seen mocking her at a rally in another state.
If the only two things you repeatedly keep bringing to the table is:
1. that she gave advice to a friend for a polygraph test (note - not even you can say she told said friend how to beat one) and;
2. that she has a fear of flying (note - by your own posts, not even you can say that the fear 100% keeps her from flying),
then you have some real problems with your own credibility. But by all means, continue to stand with those who displayed unprofessional behavior during this entire process. And by those, I mean the POTUS and several Senate republicans who wouldn't know fairness if it bit them on the fucking ass.
Please - keep comparing your weak points to what I've listed above. Your shit pales in comparison.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand.