January 24, 2019, 01:25:14 AM


Author Topic: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing  (Read 7626 times)

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #140 on: October 03, 2018, 10:09:57 AM »
Look out! Ford's ex-boyfriend just sent a letter to the SJC stating that he witnessed Ford coaching someone on how to take a polygraph, in direct contradiction to her testimony.

Also, it appears the 2nd door on her house was for some sort of business in 2008, 4 yeas before her Kavanaugh claim in 2012! (as a reason to skirt zoning regulations?) and was subsequently later leased out. This is...strange.

Her family has not been publicly supporting her at all. This is...unusual. Wouldn't a father, mother, and siblings of a woman who had been assaulted be angry as heck and bent on justice?

She has refused to turn over her therapy notes and polygraph questions, which were used as evidence to bolster her claim.

She cannot remember when it happened, where it happened, or how she got home.

Everyone alleged to be at the party either denies it or has no memory.


In spite of how convincing I found her, I have to say that looking at these things added up, I am forced to reduce her from being credible to "she might have something to say" or thereabouts. It's below 50% now for me, though it's certainly not so low a percentage that I'm wiling to say she's lying. I still think there's a decent chance she's telling the truth and some of these things can be explained or just part of the muck and mire.



Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #141 on: October 03, 2018, 01:45:09 PM »
Look out! Ford's ex-boyfriend just sent a letter to the SJC stating that he witnessed Ford coaching someone on how to take a polygraph, in direct contradiction to her testimony.

Also, it appears the 2nd door on her house was for some sort of business in 2008, 4 yeas before her Kavanaugh claim in 2012! (as a reason to skirt zoning regulations?) and was subsequently later leased out. This is...strange.

Her family has not been publicly supporting her at all. This is...unusual. Wouldn't a father, mother, and siblings of a woman who had been assaulted be angry as heck and bent on justice?

She has refused to turn over her therapy notes and polygraph questions, which were used as evidence to bolster her claim.

She cannot remember when it happened, where it happened, or how she got home.

Everyone alleged to be at the party either denies it or has no memory.


In spite of how convincing I found her, I have to say that looking at these things added up, I am forced to reduce her from being credible to "she might have something to say" or thereabouts. It's below 50% now for me, though it's certainly not so low a percentage that I'm wiling to say she's lying. I still think there's a decent chance she's telling the truth and some of these things can be explained or just part of the muck and mire.

Did this "new" information come out on the day that Trump's massive tax fraud scandal surfaced?

Just like the Republicans had all these letters from women supporting Kavannaugh when Dr. Ford's allegations first came into the public light.

Oh and Trump mocking Dr. Ford at one of his cult gatherings. I wish nothing but ill-will for him and his two retarded sons. Karma will get him eventually!

Once Dems retake the House in November then that's the end of his Presidency.

Online gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #142 on: October 04, 2018, 02:14:40 AM »
Look out! Ford's ex-boyfriend just sent a letter to the SJC stating that he witnessed Ford coaching someone on how to take a polygraph, in direct contradiction to her testimony.

Also, it appears the 2nd door on her house was for some sort of business in 2008, 4 yeas before her Kavanaugh claim in 2012! (as a reason to skirt zoning regulations?) and was subsequently later leased out. This is...strange.

Her family has not been publicly supporting her at all. This is...unusual. Wouldn't a father, mother, and siblings of a woman who had been assaulted be angry as heck and bent on justice?

She has refused to turn over her therapy notes and polygraph questions, which were used as evidence to bolster her claim.

She cannot remember when it happened, where it happened, or how she got home.

Everyone alleged to be at the party either denies it or has no memory.


In spite of how convincing I found her, I have to say that looking at these things added up, I am forced to reduce her from being credible to "she might have something to say" or thereabouts. It's below 50% now for me, though it's certainly not so low a percentage that I'm wiling to say she's lying. I still think there's a decent chance she's telling the truth and some of these things can be explained or just part of the muck and mire.
A spiteful ex-. Now that's credible testimony. Besides, he said wasn't coaching anyone to fool a polygraph, jut how to be relaxed when taking one.

No matter:
Quote
Ms. McLean put out a statement, following Fox News’ report, denying she ever had help from Ms. Blasey Ford.

“I have NEVER had Christine Blasey Ford, or anybody else, prepare me, or provide any other type of assistance whatsoever in connection with any polygraph exam I have taken at anytime,” she said.

According to the New York Post, Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley contacted Ms. Blasey Ford’s lawyers once he receive the letter, saying it “raises specific concerns about the reliability of [Ford‘s] polygraph-examination results.”

The committee retweeted the Fox News story Tuesday.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, criticized Republicans for releasing the letter, which also contained details of the relationship between Ms. Blasey Ford and the unnamed man.

“Now, in the midst of an FBI investigation, Republicans are interviewing former boyfriends of both Dr. Ford and Deborah Ramirez in a transparent attempt to discredit them,” she said in a statement. “Rape shield laws and the federal rules of evidence are designed precisely to stop this sort of attack.”

No reports of the Senate Judiciary Committee interacting with a former boyfriend of Ms. Ramirez, who was the second woman to accuse Judge Kavanaugh, have been made public.

Repugs love to attack women, don't they? Good for Democrats. Look at the polls.

Why hasn't the FBI spoken to Ford yet?

Offline Mr C

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1557
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #143 on: October 04, 2018, 07:32:37 AM »
Look out! Ford's ex-boyfriend just sent a letter to the SJC stating that he witnessed Ford coaching someone on how to take a polygraph, in direct contradiction to her testimony.

Also, it appears the 2nd door on her house was for some sort of business in 2008, 4 yeas before her Kavanaugh claim in 2012! (as a reason to skirt zoning regulations?) and was subsequently later leased out. This is...strange.

Her family has not been publicly supporting her at all. This is...unusual. Wouldn't a father, mother, and siblings of a woman who had been assaulted be angry as heck and bent on justice?

She has refused to turn over her therapy notes and polygraph questions, which were used as evidence to bolster her claim.

She cannot remember when it happened, where it happened, or how she got home.

Everyone alleged to be at the party either denies it or has no memory.


In spite of how convincing I found her, I have to say that looking at these things added up, I am forced to reduce her from being credible to "she might have something to say" or thereabouts. It's below 50% now for me, though it's certainly not so low a percentage that I'm wiling to say she's lying. I still think there's a decent chance she's telling the truth and some of these things can be explained or just part of the muck and mire.

I searched on Google for "clutching at straws" and this post came up.

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #144 on: October 04, 2018, 09:12:28 AM »
I searched on Google for "clutching at straws" and this post came up.
The accuser refusing to turn over evidence that she has used as part of the foundation for her claim is grasping at straws?

The lie detector results an therapists notes were used at the hearing. They should be available for examination. This is not a "straw", this is a critical issue.

Incidentally, the person that the ex-boyfriend claimed was assisted on the polygraph was a classmate of hers in high school, signed the letter against Kavanaugh, and that she resides in Rehobath Beach, Delaware. Why is Rehobath Beach Delaware important? Because that is where Dr. Ford testified she was when she wrote the letter naming Kavanaugh as the accuser.

And Ms. McLean's denial? It was in a letter to the media, not to the Senate. It was not a sworn statement, unlike the ex-boyfriend's.

Besides, he said wasn't coaching anyone to fool a polygraph, jut how to be relaxed when taking one.
In other words, helping them pass a polygraph. Unless you want to do it like apparently the people administering one to Dr. Ford did- When she was constantly crying according to Dr. Ford's SJC testimony, which is utterly against all standard polygraph procedure as you cannot establish a baseline.

But here's the damning part...

Christine Blasey Ford's changing Kavanaugh assault story leaves her short on credibility
Quote
These four points are significant. First, because Ford had waited 30-plus years to report the purported attack, a therapist’s notes from Ford's sessions with her husband countered claims that Ford had invented the assault to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation. But the notes did not name Ford’s attacker. And the timing of the assault summarized by her therapist, whom Ford saw individually the following year, conflicted with Ford’s current claims against Kavanaugh.

The final three contradictions are even more significant because in each circumstance Ford altered her story only after Kavanaugh and Senate investigators had obtained evidence to disprove her original tale. For instance, investigators had obtained statements from Kavanaugh and the two men and one female lifelong friend of Ford’s, and they all denied any recollection of the gathering.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-changing-memories-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/

Other people have noted that every detail Ford has mentioned, has been made with either pre-existing public information or in response to information/testimony that was disclosed to the public.

Is Dr. Ford still credible? Yes or no?

Offline alexisalex

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #145 on: October 04, 2018, 09:21:13 AM »
British person here so I've not been following this at all but out of curiosity I watched some of the testimony.

Her voice!!  Why is she pretending to be a twelve year old girl?  :huh:

Offline sh9wntm

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 197
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #146 on: October 04, 2018, 10:01:03 AM »
British person here so I've not been following this at all but out of curiosity I watched some of the testimony.

Her voice!!  Why is she pretending to be a twelve year old girl?  :huh:

That's what I'm saying... She seemed to be forcing an act, whether she's telling the truth or not. If she teaches University students, I can't imagine she talks like a ditsy California girl to them.

More from that letter:
He says she never once mentioned trauma about this or showed signs of trauma over the 6 years they dated. Never told him anything. Maybe it didn't bother her then?
She cheated on him and lied about credit card fraud.
She flew (and still flys) often and on small planes. (Plus she dives, if you're claustrophobic, diving would give you intense fear.)

Remember her fear of flying is why she couldn't testify earlier. Along with the media leaks, the fact Feinstein had this months in advance, the senate votes were on the horizon, it's pretty obvious the DP has a lot to gain by drawing this out. This all could of been done privately, but then the media wouldn't have been able to smear Kavanaugh and they wouldn't be able to rally the sheep against him.

Online gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #147 on: October 04, 2018, 10:28:12 AM »
I searched on Google for "clutching at straws" and this post came up.
The accuser refusing to turn over evidence that she has used as part of the foundation for her claim is grasping at straws?

The lie detector results an therapists notes were used at the hearing. They should be available for examination. This is not a "straw", this is a critical issue.

Incidentally, the person that the ex-boyfriend claimed was assisted on the polygraph was a classmate of hers in high school, signed the letter against Kavanaugh, and that she resides in Rehobath Beach, Delaware. Why is Rehobath Beach Delaware important? Because that is where Dr. Ford testified she was when she wrote the letter naming Kavanaugh as the accuser.

And Ms. McLean's denial? It was in a letter to the media, not to the Senate. It was not a sworn statement, unlike the ex-boyfriend's.

Besides, he said wasn't coaching anyone to fool a polygraph, jut how to be relaxed when taking one.
In other words, helping them pass a polygraph. Unless you want to do it like apparently the people administering one to Dr. Ford did- When she was constantly crying according to Dr. Ford's SJC testimony, which is utterly against all standard polygraph procedure as you cannot establish a baseline.

But here's the damning part...

Christine Blasey Ford's changing Kavanaugh assault story leaves her short on credibility
Quote
These four points are significant. First, because Ford had waited 30-plus years to report the purported attack, a therapist’s notes from Ford's sessions with her husband countered claims that Ford had invented the assault to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation. But the notes did not name Ford’s attacker. And the timing of the assault summarized by her therapist, whom Ford saw individually the following year, conflicted with Ford’s current claims against Kavanaugh.

The final three contradictions are even more significant because in each circumstance Ford altered her story only after Kavanaugh and Senate investigators had obtained evidence to disprove her original tale. For instance, investigators had obtained statements from Kavanaugh and the two men and one female lifelong friend of Ford’s, and they all denied any recollection of the gathering.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-changing-memories-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/

Other people have noted that every detail Ford has mentioned, has been made with either pre-existing public information or in response to information/testimony that was disclosed to the public.

Is Dr. Ford still credible? Yes or no?
Once again you've twisted my words. You continue to be bottom-feeding scum.

So your fellow repugs post an anonymous letter yet out Monica McLean (a woman of course, aren't they all despicable liars, why can't they just lie back and try to enjoy our white pencil dicks?) a respected former FBI agent.

They and of course you wouldn't know shame if it bit them on the ankle.

The elections are coming.

Offline saram_

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #148 on: October 04, 2018, 10:29:09 AM »
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/03/politics/mcconnell-kavanaugh-nomination-vote/index.html

It's happening. This whole saga is nothing about finding out the truth (for now) but all about pushing through the nomination as quickly as possible.

If Kavanaugh doesn't get approved it would be the beginning of impeachment basically with the Mid-Terms on the horizon.

Offline CDW

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #149 on: October 04, 2018, 10:40:04 AM »
At least one of his accusers certainly doesn't seem very credible.

Quote
"During a conversation about our sexual preferences, things got derailed when Julie told me that she liked to have sex with more than one guy at a time. In fact sometimes with several at one time. She wanted to know if that would be ok in our relationship.
 
"I asked her if this was just a fantasy of hers. She responded that she first tried sex with multiple guys while in high school and still liked it from time-to-time. She brought it up because she wanted to know if I would be interested in that."

 
"Julie never said anything about being sexually assaulted, raped, gang-raped or having sex against her will. She never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh in any capacity."
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/judiciary-committee-receives-statement-regarding-swetnick-allegations

Quote
The ex-boyfriend of Julie Swetnick, the third woman to make uncorroborated, lurid allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, told Fox News exclusively on Monday that she had threatened to kill his unborn child and at times even bizarrely asked him to hit her.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-boyfriend-says-kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-threatened-to-kill-his-unborn-child-was-exaggerating-everything

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #150 on: October 04, 2018, 11:01:21 AM »
So your fellow repugs post an anonymous letter yet out Monica McLean (a woman of course, aren't they all despicable liars, why can't they just lie back and try to enjoy our white pencil dicks?) a respected former FBI agent.
The letter was signed and sworn and sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The person who signed it had their name redacted when it was released to the public. It's not an anonymous letter.

Blasey Ford changed her story every time new information came to light, so that her story could match with that information. That is deeply troublesome.

Quote
(a woman of course, aren't they all despicable liars, why can't they just lie back and try to enjoy our white pencil dicks?)

Nice side-stepping of the fact that Blasey Ford was in the same small city in Delaware that McLean happens to reside in when she wrote the letter to Dianne Feinstein.

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #151 on: October 04, 2018, 11:28:52 AM »
I'm not sure on the elections. According to the Upshot's Nate Cohn at the New York Times, when analyzing battleground congressional districts, things are different than the generic ballot. Republicans are surprisingly competitive. Remember- all politics is local. GOP has a decent chance to pick off McCaskill, Heitkamp, Nelson, Menendez, and Donnelly. Dems MUST pick off Cruz, Blackburn, McSally, and Heller, and play defense. Regardless, impeachment is virtually impossible.

Also, in the latest polls, Heitkamp has collapsed. McCaskill and Bredeson have gone from clear leads to dead heats. On the other hand, Joe Manchin has seen his lead remain relatively stable and I think he may survive.

The Dems really screwed the pooch on this one. The GOP is now as fired up as the Democrats and may turn out in 2010 levels. Given that Republicans historically are more likely to vote in mid-terms, this isn't good for the Democrats.

I think Feinstein really screwed the pooch on this one. She should have either dropped the allegations early or not dropped them at all. Playing them at the last possible minute, combined with the less credible accusations being tossed about and conflated, really damaged the Democrats' messaging on this and motivated the Republicans. If the Blue Wave runs into a Red Wall, you can blame Feinstein.

Tighter messaging and not letting hucksters like Avenatti and his trainwreck of a client jump on board would have blunted this.

Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #152 on: October 04, 2018, 11:57:30 AM »
I'm not sure on the elections. According to the Upshot's Nate Cohn at the New York Times, when analyzing battleground congressional districts, things are different than the generic ballot. Republicans are surprisingly competitive. Remember- all politics is local. GOP has a decent chance to pick off McCaskill, Heitkamp, Nelson, Menendez, and Donnelly. Dems MUST pick off Cruz, Blackburn, McSally, and Heller, and play defense. Regardless, impeachment is virtually impossible.

Also, in the latest polls, Heitkamp has collapsed. McCaskill and Bredeson have gone from clear leads to dead heats. On the other hand, Joe Manchin has seen his lead remain relatively stable and I think he may survive.

The Dems really screwed the pooch on this one. The GOP is now as fired up as the Democrats and may turn out in 2010 levels. Given that Republicans historically are more likely to vote in mid-terms, this isn't good for the Democrats.

I think Feinstein really screwed the pooch on this one. She should have either dropped the allegations early or not dropped them at all. Playing them at the last possible minute, combined with the less credible accusations being tossed about and conflated, really damaged the Democrats' messaging on this and motivated the Republicans. If the Blue Wave runs into a Red Wall, you can blame Feinstein.

Tighter messaging and not letting hucksters like Avenatti and his trainwreck of a client jump on board would have blunted this.

I think you underestimate the enthusiasm that stems from the Democratic side.

Just look at all the House races that have really good Democratic candidates which have turned safe Republicans seats towards "toss-ups" or "Lean D".

For the Senate, Democrats were always on the back foot. They had a lot more seats to defend. The fact that Republicans are pumping millions of outside funds into Texas tell us how worried they are.

MO and ND look to be the only worry for the Dems but AZ, NV, and TN could be possible pick-ups. I would love to see "Lying Ted" lose in TX but I think he will scrape through.

This Kavanaugh fiasco is only turning suburban women to the Democratic side and with more women running on the Democratic side things seem brighter.

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #153 on: October 04, 2018, 02:38:41 PM »
I agree that's how things were looking pre-Kavanaugh. Post-Kavanaugh? Republicans really seeemed energized.

If the Dems had just let Ford testify and not prejudged Kavanaugh and made this about her, they'd be cruising now. They prejudged him, allowed sketchy less credible accusers to get mixed in and made this about Kavanaugh to the point of farce.

The problem is while lots of women can see themselves in a sex assault victim, EVERYONE can put themselves in the shoes of being falsely accused.

Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #154 on: October 04, 2018, 04:22:01 PM »
I agree that's how things were looking pre-Kavanaugh. Post-Kavanaugh? Republicans really seeemed energized.

If the Dems had just let Ford testify and not prejudged Kavanaugh and made this about her, they'd be cruising now. They prejudged him, allowed sketchy less credible accusers to get mixed in and made this about Kavanaugh to the point of farce.

The problem is while lots of women can see themselves in a sex assault victim, EVERYONE can put themselves in the shoes of being falsely accused.

Energized? No, it's more deluded or hypnotized. Once you get on the Team Trump cult bandwagon there's no escape.

Kavanaugh prejudiced himself with his angry, raging, conspiracy theory driven persona that came right after his choirboy Fox News interview persona.

Your last sentence is disingenuous. Who's more likely to be a sex assault victim? A man or woman?

Falsely accused? Who's that? At least two of the assault accusations are highly credible.

Trump has always had his base, it's the non-base support that he is losing.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 07:13:10 PM by Savant »

Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #155 on: October 04, 2018, 06:21:47 PM »

Online gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #156 on: October 04, 2018, 07:14:13 PM »
I agree that's how things were looking pre-Kavanaugh. Post-Kavanaugh? Republicans really seeemed energized.

If the Dems had just let Ford testify and not prejudged Kavanaugh and made this about her, they'd be cruising now. They prejudged him, allowed sketchy less credible accusers to get mixed in and made this about Kavanaugh to the point of farce.

The problem is while lots of women can see themselves in a sex assault victim, EVERYONE can put themselves in the shoes of being falsely accused.
Those made in china repug shoes never fit right, do they?

As always, you've got things assbackwards. Dems ARE cruising; drumpf is preaching to an ever-smaller choir of religious fanatics and white male nativists.

Online gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #157 on: October 04, 2018, 07:51:58 PM »
1000+ and counting lawyers have signed a statement opposing kavanug's confirmation. What does that tell you?

Online Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5968
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #158 on: October 04, 2018, 10:56:35 PM »
Ford's credibility is falling the more comes out. The fact that she changed her story each time in response to the release of information that became public is deeply troubling. No one has been able to corroborate her story.

Ramirez's claim is not credible. She says she was incredibly intoxicated and that she only recalled the event 1) When she heard Kavanaugh's name in the news, and 2) After days of refreshing her memory with a lawyer (a Democratic operative). Ramirez called other classmates in an attempt to get them to verify the story and provided them as possible witnesses. None have any memory of the incident with a couple refuting it. Her one source that said that he had heard about her story, was not a witness, and named a source who has denied any memory of it.

Swetnick is a disaster. One minute of watching her interview and you can tell she's full of it. When the MSNBC interviewer is giving you the skeptical eye, you know it's bad. She contradicted her sword statement during her interview.

The fourth claim was second hand and has been rejected by the person in question

The fifth person withdrew their claim and has publicly apologized for making a false accusation.

There's nothing against Kavanaugh except the allegation by Ford, which is on really shaky ground to the point that the preponderance of the evidence favors Kavanaugh over her. Time for Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court.

Online gogators!

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #159 on: October 05, 2018, 04:11:19 AM »
Ford's credibility is falling the more comes out. The fact that she changed her story each time in response to the release of information that became public is deeply troubling. No one has been able to corroborate her story.

Ramirez's claim is not credible. She says she was incredibly intoxicated and that she only recalled the event 1) When she heard Kavanaugh's name in the news, and 2) After days of refreshing her memory with a lawyer (a Democratic operative). Ramirez called other classmates in an attempt to get them to verify the story and provided them as possible witnesses. None have any memory of the incident with a couple refuting it. Her one source that said that he had heard about her story, was not a witness, and named a source who has denied any memory of it.

Swetnick is a disaster. One minute of watching her interview and you can tell she's full of it. When the MSNBC interviewer is giving you the skeptical eye, you know it's bad. She contradicted her sword statement during her interview.

The fourth claim was second hand and has been rejected by the person in question

The fifth person withdrew their claim and has publicly apologized for making a false accusation.

There's nothing against Kavanaugh except the allegation by Ford, which is on really shaky ground to the point that the preponderance of the evidence favors Kavanaugh over her. Time for Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court.
LOL. How about the fact that he lied (and lied and lied some more) under oath? I know you think lying is A-OK, but most folks don't. He's not credible. The story he's spun about himself is half fiction. He's also demonstrated that he doesn't have the temperament or the objectivity to be the Mayberry justice pf the peace let alone a supreme court justice.

What happened to that rule of law repugs were going on about? Is that only for folks of a different skin color?

Let's hear what the FBI has to say rather than repug operatives in their $1000 suits and blowdry helmets of hair (the ones that still have hair, that is).