standards at all. Dems are full of Ch!t.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/09/19/minnesota-democrats-keith-ellison/
http://dailycaller.com/2018/09/19/minnesota-democrats-keith-ellison/
If it Weren't for Double Standards, They'd have No...
- Thread starter orangelvis
- Start date
Both sides have scumbags, acting like that isn't true and only Democrats or only Republican's have issues with this is doing a disservice to America.
Were you drunk posting this? Not exactly sure of your point. Punctuation can be helpful. If your point is that both sides have scumbags and pointing out dem double standards is me doing a disservice to America, then I'll simply say that while there are scumbags everywhere dem and repub, there only ONE PARTY, the dems, that hold themselves up as the champions of women and "women's issues". Of course this means very little to this battered woman, or the women raped and accosted by Bill Clinton, etc. In fact, the democrat "handler", for this woman accusing Kavanaugh, is the same woman who didn't believe Paula Jones; while representing Bill.
Ricki Seidman is the real accuser. Christine Ford has been manipulated and used by the dem party. Remember, she never wanted her name to go public. The dems don't give a sh!t about Christine Ford, just like they don't give a sh!t about Keith Ellison's girl friend. Grow a brain.
you might as well title your posts "what Tucker Carlson said last night".
Meh... Tucker/Hannity are smart dudes. So when our Lord and Savior Trump gives us our marching orders, they have to spin this stuff so that people who claim to be Christians can at least pretend that this stuff is moral. One of the GREAT ways to do this is by dehumanizing the people you are attacking. Step 1. Never call them by their names. Then paint them as a willing tool of some vast process or system. It's not accidental...
It won't be long before we start seeing Ford's past boyfriends coming out of the wood work to "slut shame" her.
What if they can also pass a "Lie Detector Test". Also, apparently she can't even remember exactly when or where the event took place.
STEP 1. the point is, she never wanted her name to be used. The opportunistic Dems are the ones TAKING ADVANTAGE OF HER. But, that's probably way over your head.
More Republican playbook here. Hannity has taught you well. The weaker the position, the more you attack the person (in this case me). But dude you have to step up your game, you sound almost sympathetic to Ford. That's yesterday's tactic. Aren't you listening to your Dear Leader today? He's already fired the 1st shot at Ford... asking for police reports when he knows she never filed any complaint. Soon she's going to be just another liar like the 19 women who accused Trump.
Actually, no. I don't even Tweet nor follow Twitter, if that's what you're referring to. I can think for myself and also refer back to the history of democrat playbooks...see Clarence Thomas.
BTW...There is no statute of limitations in Maryland. She should file a police report...no?
Of course she, or rather her dem "handlers" have already stated that she won't even testify under oath to the Senate!
So let me get this straight. She's 15 and goes to a high school party where everyone is drinking? Do you think that she told her parents where she was going and that there was a party with guys and alcohol? She gets attacked by a drunk guy (while probably being drunk herself) and you think that she was going to call the freaking cops? Come on man. What teenager would EVER do that?
So, let me get this straight. You don't understand what "no statute of limitations" means?
Besides, if she can't remember where she was, exactly, who else was there, exactly, or even what year it was, exactly. Maybe she's not even sure who it was exactly. No one else that she claims was there can even remember being there!
The main point here is not that she didn't experience something; she's not claiming she was raped. This whole thing is just a bunch of dems taking advantage of this woman; using her to circumvent the President's right to appoint a SC justice and have that nominee come to a Senate confirmation vote. Maybe your head is so far up your own ass that you can't see the facts.
Here is a definitive and factual, (footnoted by links) of the whole timeline of what has happened in this allegation. I think it is more than fair to say that the dems are not being fair to either the professor nor to the appointee and are/have pressured the professor; probably against her own wishes for political purposes. They don't, and haven't given two sh!ts about her wishes/well-being and have leaked, pushed and manipulated the situation with the only goal of not having a vote by next Wednesday.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...demands-for-christine-blasey-fords-testimony/
Just compare the above with how they are treating Keith Ellison's accuser.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...ser-dems-have-smeared-threatened-isolated-me/
Game Over.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...demands-for-christine-blasey-fords-testimony/
Just compare the above with how they are treating Keith Ellison's accuser.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...ser-dems-have-smeared-threatened-isolated-me/
Game Over.
Last edited:
What is it called when a pro life conservative politician tries to talk his mistress into getting an abortion?
I agree that she wouldn’t have went to the police. I also think most her story is probably true.
The issue I have is why now? It is obvious her reasoning. The dude made a mistake in high school while drinking. It’s highschool, same reason they shouldn’t vote. He didn’t rape her either. I can’t justify this as reason for him not to be a Supreme Court Judge.
This was a last ditch effort by the Dems to block him. You got love how much of a mess our politics are. Damn circus from both sides.
As I said earlier in thread, plenty of individual scumbags to go around everywhere. This is dem political ploy and nothing to do with the professor. All the dems care about is shutting down the vote. They are using this woman, Dr. Ford and they are the ones responsible for ruining her life. She never wanted to come forward. The dems forced the situation; leaked the info; refuse to even show Grassley the letter.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/09/21/ricki-seidman-strategy-defeat-kavanaugh/
Last edited:
Lol wut? I did "go there" . Tell me more about why I don't want to.
because you're referring to Garland and anyone who has a brain knows that he didn't come up for a vote because of a longstanding precedent, first implemented by democrats. It's whiney and lame. That's why.
Watching football and not going to look up details right now. Maybe "precedent" was wrong word. Should be "practice" maybe; the "practice" of a majority party Senate not putting through SC nominees during presidential election years. The argument was first made by dems and has previously been used by both parties prior to Garland, and I know you know this. You don;t waant to sound like this guy:
https://www.breitbart.com/video/201...e-up-for-scotus-it-should-be-merrick-garland/
Any and everyone knows this is a scam! I will call it like I see it....scam! If that girl had been sexually assaulted back then, her parents would have found out and they would have strung someone by the nuts. This is phony to stop the nomination plain and simple. On top of it being 36 years ago, the ridiculous demands and delay tactics cement whats going on here.
Let the woman come in Thursday and say what shes got to say and anything short of a strong bit of evidence in her favor and its over. They should then vote on Thursday up or down. There is going to be no evidence. All people interviewed so far have denied any knowledge of what this woman is talking about. Some former high school classmate came out on twitter and said she remembered talk of it and then quickly backed down from the statement. Additionally, we are supposed to believe classmates somehow knew about it, but parents were totally in the dark?
The nail in the coffin is that Kavanaugh's mother presided over a bankruptcy trial against Ford's parents and that is her motive to lie along with her obvious other liberal leanings.
The lawyers will rip this woman up one side and down the other if she shows up Thursday. I doubt that she will show up honestly.
Why is this woman loading up lawyers? All she has is a "she said, he said" case. No one, friend or foe, is backing up her story. Still say she is just being used by dems; who don't give a rat's ass about her.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/third-named-witness-rejects-kavanaughs-accusers-allegations/
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/third-named-witness-rejects-kavanaughs-accusers-allegations/
When you attack the person or their grammar, it's because you know you have a weak argument.
Hahahaha. This thread is full of "arguments". None however have come from you. Hahaha.
Dude you are full of crap.
If that girl had been sexually assaulted back then, her parents would have found out and they would have strung someone by the nuts.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2010-2014 (2015); stats show that at least 60% of sexual assaults are not reported. Note that this is up from over 70% in 2004.
The fact that you think "someone" or her parents would know speaks volumes about your ignorance of this issue. Hell, you probably think if she were dressed a certain way, she was "asking for it". The thing is, she was at a party (that she probably wasn't supposed to be at), drinking (which she DEFINITELY wasn't supposed to be doing), and she didn't get raped, just attacked. If you think she was going to go running to her parents about it, I don't know what to say...
To be fair:
FBI statistics also state that between 2 and 10 percent of sexual assault claims are fake. So using a best case example, there's about a 90% chance she's telling the truth.
--------------------------------------------
The fact of the matter is that you have no freaking idea whether this occurred or not. But you WANT another conservative candidate on the court so you are perfectly willing to confirm him whether he did this or not (Bill Clinton supporters are just as bad, so I guess you are in common if not good company) OF COURSE the Dems are using this to keep him from being confirmed. This is apparent to anyone, just as the Republicans would do if the situation were reversed. IMHO, this is the constitution in action and working as intended.
Personally, I think that about 90% of the Senate confirmation questions are bogus myself. Whether he is conservative or liberal, Roe v. Wade, all those kind of questions are meaningless and shouldn't even be allowed. The President chooses who he wants on the court... that takes care of all of the above issues. The Senate should only be concerned with whether the person is professionally qualified (which Kavanaugh most certainly is) and isn't a person who doesn't belong on the SCOTUS (ie criminal, crazy, bad judgement, etc). THIS accusation brings the 2nd part into question and should be looked at.
And I get that he was in high school/college when these two things happened. From what I read, the second accusation (whether true or not, simply isn't disqualifying) So he got drunk and waved his dick in front of a girl (and a bunch of others) at a party? Ok, not his best moment for sure, but we should all be wiling to write that one off as harmless. Youngsters do stupid stuff, especially when drunk. No harm no foul here. Ford on the other hand is a bigger deal. We as a society do try teenagers as adults for serious crimes all the time, so they ARE considered responsible. Luring a 15 year old girl into a room, holding her down and muffling her screams while trying to take her clothes off is a big deal. And according to Ford, he didn't change his mind and let her up... she fought hard enough to get away. That's not like the 1st example and shouldn't be treated as such.
Now we are going to hear from both parties and get to decide who to believe. While the Dems most certainly do have a bunch to gain by this, the woman in question doesn't. Things don't generally work out well for whistle blowers as a rule, and you are absolutely correct that lawyers (GOP Senators in this case) are going to rip this woman up one side and down the other when she shows up. You don't even know or care if she's telling the truth or not and you are practically jumping up and down to she her ripped apart. That pretty much status quo for people who accuse others (particularly powerful men) of this.
We see this all the time. She's going to be asked about her sex life, if she lead him on, if she was drinking or (insert reasons she might have been "asking for it"). That's going to happen. She knows that. Her life is never going to be the same again whether Kavanaugh gets confirmed or not. And she knows this going forward. But still, here she is...
On this we totally agree. Hell, if I were going into that meat grinder of a confirmation hearing, I'd have all the lawyers I could beg borrow or steal myself. I also agree that the Dems are completely using her to stop the confirmation process. They absolutely don't give a crap about her.
Neither of those things make the slightest difference... As I've said before. Kavanaugh's political leanings should make no difference in this process. The President chooses that. All the Senate should be doing is checking to see if the person is qualified and suitable for the position. Personally Kavanaugh is way right of what I'd want on the court (I prefer moderates/centrists myself) but it's not my decision, President Trump gets to choose the political leanings of his nominees, and IMHO it's not the Senate's place to question that. BUT it IS the Senate's place to question Kavanaugh on this accusation and get to the bottom of it.
And that brings us to what disqualifying action really means. First of all, this is obviously a he said she said kind of thing. Statute of limitations aside, there's simply no way Kavanaugh could be convicted for this. That's as it should be. It makes Rape and Sexual assault very difficult to prove, but innocent until proven guilty trumps all. A supreme court nomination IS NOT a criminal matter. It's a lifetime appointment to a very powerful government body. The person put in this position should be above reproach. That doesn't mean Kavanaugh has to remove himself if someone comes out of the woodwork, but it does make the bar for the accuser quite a bit lower. If I found her testimony compelling and her background solid, I'd vote him down. While I have no idea whether this accusation is true or not, I notice that no nominee since Thomas (liberal or conservative) has had an issue like this come up. So it's NOT normal.
It doesn't ruin his life. He goes right back to his high paying lifetime job as a federal judge. He'll never be charged with any crime and he can sue the crap out of her if he can make it stick. That's not ruined.
If you believe this load of crap then I got some oceanfront property in Missouri to sell you. This is totally unbelievable and a total joke. Like we determined before, you and I are basically from different planets. So be it. I respect your right to your wrong opinion and I will continue to state mine.
Any family in her social status circles would most certainly not ignore a sexual assault of their daughter. No way that would happen. This is all hypothetical and lame anyway. No one is backing up or confirming her story at all and based on accounts so far heard, she is not even sure. This is all a lie to stop the Kavanaugh nomination. I call it like I see it.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
I agree with everything except the last paragraph. If he's not confirmed, he's branded as a sexual deviant for life. His reputation and life are ruined and he cannot go back to his judgeship. You're right that he'll never be charged with any crime; because there is not a scintilla of evidence that he did anything. No corroboration. Nothing.
You see this is not about Kavanaugh. This is about power. The dems are trying to show everyone how they obtain/keep power even when they lose elections...by any means possible. They'll do and say anything. They're making an example out of Kavanaugh. Who would ever be willing to go through this? This guy has been through 6 FBI background checks in his professional life. You know how thorough those things are? You think any of this might have popped up during the extensive interviews? The dems will be throwing out more and more unsubstantiated allegations as we approach the vote.
Last edited:
