A picture says a thousand words
 

LMAO @ those signs :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Do3fQQMV4AAmM6-.jpg

Wow... just wow...

Don't you think we should expect a justice of the supreme court to not be blatantly partisan? Why should it be acceptable for a justice to be rude, combative, and dismissive to senators? The members of the SCOTUS should be held to the highest standard, and Kavanaugh falls far below it.

She actually posted this image herself to promote being a guest on a show :1orglaugh:1orglaugh




I'll hand this one over to your leader

Wow I had to watch that twice. They literally did everything she said they didn't do :1orglaugh

There's allegations from three very credible people that BK assaulted them, and dozens more who said his testimony was false. Which is more likely - that BK is the target of an elaborate democratic conspiracy to smear his name, one which has no supporting evidence - or that maybe they're telling the truth?

^^^ Truth

Besides Blasey Ford, who else was credible?

Here's the list of BK's accusers, what they said, and what is known about them - source

All three are verified to have been in the places they alleged. All three are working professionals. Swetnick (the most recent accuser) has held several government positions and has security clearances.

Not a single one of them are credible.. Not a single one of them have any evidence or corroboration. Just the claim.. It was a "smear" plain and simple.

Jill Harth (1997)

Harth filed a lawsuit in 1997 in which she accused Trump of non-consensual groping of her body, among them her "intimate private parts",[24][25] and "relentless" sexual harassment.[26] The suit was withdrawn after Houraney settled with Trump "


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

This idiot can't even follow a conversation. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

↑^↑ This fake nic cunt can't even connect the dots her manpussy is so infected with yetti pube mushroom fungus

Swetnick said she saw him spiking the punch then totally changed it to saw him "near" the punch. Then she said there were gang rapes at the party then changed that to "maybe" there were gang rapes at the party. Plus numerous other changes to her story. Plus she had a restraining order against her along with extensive history of lawsuits - one of them for forging college & work history on a job application.

Dude she fucking far from credible.

↑↑↑ Anonymous alt-right stinky liquid turd butt slinger thinks she is credible online being anonymous in 2018 :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Here's a list of people with evidence that could have shed light on the allegations - source

As you can see, a few were talked to by the FBI, and most were not. Even without all these witnesses, what makes the original three accusers not credible? It's a serious allegation to say they're part of a criminal conspiracy to "smear" BK, so where is the evidence of this?

I see it now, you?

https://img.memecdn.com/connect-the-dots_o_1471305.jpg

Mentally unhinged snowflake
https://i.imgur.com/ht27JMj.jpg

You're correct that she walked back her written statement to say they were "near" the punch, but she never had a restraining order placed on her - the claim was thrown out. As was the claim about forging work/college history - source

Also - this isn't about getting a criminal conviction. Its not like Kavanaugh gets the job or goes straight to prison. The question is, does the net total of these allegations cast a reasonable doubt on the character of BK? In addition to the three accusers, there are many more than can back them up or confirm BK was lying in his testimony. Most all of these were excluded from the FBI investigation.

You're not American you are eurotrash on your best day.

You are not fooling anyone you low self-esteem morbidly obese hate troll. Your life is such shit that you work so cheap to fail at life's basic goal: to flourish & reproduce. You can't you are not worthy.

Your source doesn't say shit.

"Miami-Dade County court docket shows a petition for injunction against Swetnick was filed March 1, 2001, by her former boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy,"

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...accuser-845348

You're not fooling anyone you cheap hate troll

Hey Mr California you can't even win a discussion against a foreigner whom's first language isn't English. The liberal retardness in a nutshell. :1orglaugh

You're not fooling anyone you cheap hate fake nic troll

Trump has killed the GOP you retard. Democrats are full of centrists & conservatives now you cheap Russian fake nic troll :1orglaugh

No impulse control fake nic Drax aka Onwebcam reply in 3... 2... 1...

Here's him telling you himself she threatened to kill him and his family

↑↑↑ Fake nic troll fighting for acknowledgement in his time of loss

From my source "But records show the suit was dismissed two weeks after he filed a petition for the order." - So she never actually had a restraining order filed against her. Your politico article says the same. Which begs the question - if she was actually dangerous as the Ex claims, wouldn't he have followed through with that?

But even if she DID have one filed against her - does that mean her claim of sexual assault shouldn't be investigated? Why would this in itself imply she was lying?

↑↑↑
Retard Onwebcam aka Drax aka tfto aka Helix aka mineistaken etc. etc. "the driver" online today , all logged out

OneHunglo aka Onwebcam fake nic reply in 3.. 2.. 1..

It's really a topic that doesn't even matter any longer.. Ford has stated she's not pursuing any further.. Obviously because she was lying to begin with.. And the left is blaming Avenatti for ruining their scheme by bring these other frauds into the mix.. ALL of these people are praying tonight that Kavanaugh doesn't sue the shit out of them for slandering him.

Webtrends sued her originally for falsely claimed unemployment and added on to the complaint that she also lied about graduating from John Hopkins University. The case "voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice" due to them reaching some type of deal where (my guess) she gets stops getting disability payments from WebTrends’ insurance. She lied on her resume and was cheating the company's insurance carrier - this to me says a lot about her character.

Speaking of character, someone attempted to place a restraining order on her. It was dismissed because whoever filed it didn't follow through with it. Regardless, people don't put restraining orders on people for no reason. Especially men.

If you were dating a girl and she revealed that someone had placed a restraining order her but it got dismissed, would you be cool with that? I rest my case.

Here's the ultimate point I'm trying to make:

The SCOTUS is a judicial body that is supposed to be totally dedicated to the rule of law first - over ANY party affiliations. In his testimony, BK revealed himself to be completely partisan when he alleged, with zero evidence, that he was the subject of a democratic conspiracy.

I'm a very liberal guy, but if a liberal judge was up for the SCOTUS, and he complained that the sexual assault allegations against him were the fault of some elaborate republican conspiracy, with no evidence, I'd be appalled and say he's unfit for the job. I'd also think the allegations, even if only from a SINGLE credible witness, was disqualifying.

Politics isn't just about your side winning. When the court has obvious partisanship, we all lose, because it calls into question the integrity of every decision they make. After BK's testimony, where he made it clear he favors one party over another, he destroyed his credibility as a judge on any court, let alone the very highest.

You're assuming he doesn't have the evidence.. Why did Feinstein want the report sealed before she even read it?????????????


Because she knew it was all a lie..... She was literally crying after she read it...

They were drawing everyone's attention to July 1st.. The FBI interviewed her boyfriend who was there that night... So the story changed yet again..

I don't know what you're referring to - the FBI report of the week-long investigation?

Yes, before it was even done Feinstein was calling for it to be sealed....


https://thepoliticalinsider.com/fein...gh-fbi-sealed/

She had a sudden case of "protect those involved" after spending a week or two trouncing Kavanaugh. Then her two-faced ass comes out and says "we'll find out what's in the report" right after she just read the fucking thing.

A few things - that "news source" is obviously extremely partisan. It doesn't hide its very right-wing agenda, and provided no link to the source of the claim. I had to dig around to find this quote from Feinstein:

"It would seem to me that if people are going to be identified this ought to be held very close and not. I think the investigation ought to be closely held"

So she's claiming it should be held for privacy reasons. You will probably say its a conspiracy to cover up proof of a smear - but remember that every R senator on the committee read the report and only said it contained no corroborating evidence. If it was a bombshell that proved a criminal conspiracy then senators would be DEMANDING it get released immediately. Lindsey Graham just said the report was "good for Kavanaugh". Theres no great conspiracy here. And you gotta use better news sources.

It's all over.. Do I have to find you a youtube vid or can you do your own shit?

Here ya go here's a cnn article telling you it in a cnn way

"I personally want it released to the public," Graham said

"The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, sided with McConnell, telling reporters at midday that she was concerned about witness confidentiality being breached should the reports be made public."
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/02/polit...ugh/index.html

She's all of sudden concerned about "confidentiality" after slinging mud all over everyone. Pretty much everyone interviewed already gave a public statement.. Except her boyfriend........ Who came out in the report...

I don't know what that means. If you're still convinced the FBI report has some bombshell info proving a cover-up, Pelosi is currently trying to get it released with a FOIA request - source

Funny thing about that.. Go look at her tweet.. Senate Judiciary trolled her with a link to where to file the request. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Why not just leak it? Nothing to lose at this point right?

So this is confusing to me.

First I said that BK had no evidence of a conspiracy against him, then you said there was evidence - in the FBI report - which is why, you claimed, Feinstein wanted it sealed. But Mitch McConnell also wants it sealed. And Pelosi wants it released. And no republicans who have read the report have said anything about a conspiracy.

So the point stands - BK has no evidence of a criminal conspiracy against him, but he still said that in his testimony.

The man knows what he did or didn't do.. If he knows he didn't do what he's being accused of then it's pretty easy for himself to conclude there's a conspiracy to smear him.......

Why are her lawyers as well as Feinstein refusing to turn over communications and "evidence?" Why is Grassley asking about communications between the accusers? Because he already knows.. He's not asking questions he doesn't already know the answer to..

No, a federal judge should not immediately jump to partisan conspiracy as an explanation for a false sexual assault claim (assuming it was indeed false). He could have said that Ford was miss-identifying her attackers, or even that he believed she wasn't telling the truth. Instead, here's what he said:

"This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups"

He's making a very specific claim, that Ford is only alleging the assault because of partisan anger and conspiracy. This is unacceptable for any judge to claim without evidence.

Because that's EXACTLY what it was? She very likely did either knowingly or unknowingly misidentify Kavanaugh considering 1. Someone else confessed along with witness corroboration and 2. that person has likely already been made public but the story got shut down...

I don't know anymore man. You're claiming more unsourced left-wing conspiracies than I can even keep track of.

Congressional record. "Garrett" was outed over the weekend.. This "mysterious" man came forward Monday. Another unnamed man backs up his claim (likely Judge) .. Judge and Garrett are good friends to this day.. Garrett and Kavanaugh could be twins. Garrett lived in a house exactly as described in a location exactly as described.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoEWSDDUUAMIehL.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoEWe-DV4AAZhKB.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoEWu_dUwAASuvo.jpg


That story breaking out would have killed it right then.. So they doubled, even tripled down with more false claims hoping that would cover their ass.

#metoo will result in that if you tried to kiss a girl when you where 12 and she turned away, that there is a change you could and up as a #metoo victim and being accused of rape 30,40,50 years later.

wasn't there a saying 'no means yes' :)

Even in Holland some people wrote that it all was a democratic campaign where they don't fear to use false testimonials. All is accepted as long as it is against Trump.