I'm starting to think that she is upset that he said no to her advances.
Brett Kavanaugh rape allegations
488,615 Views |
5316 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by 93MarineHorn
****ing Grassley. Delaying again until Thursday is pathetic.
aggiehawg said:So that raises the question, why hasn't she done that yet? Surely her lawyers have talked to Maryland authorities just to check it out if there was such a possibility.Rapier108 said:One would think so, but Maryland is just slightly less liberal than California, so the AG would likely drag it out for months or longer, just to cause trouble. And just like old Ronnie Earl used to do in Travis County, he could have Kavanaugh indicted, even though he would know it would never go to trial.aggiehawg said:Her attempt to file charges would make news as the Maryland AG would be forced to go on record that there isn't enough credible evidence to proceed with an investigation.Rapier108 said:Fox is just slightly less unhinged on this than the rest.Burdizzo said:
WTF is up with Fox News? They have a poll on their front page claiming more Americans believe her than believe him.
Notice Hannity, Tucker, and Laura cannot really say much against her. They can say things like "presumption of innocence" and these claimed witnesses have said it didn't happen, but that's it. Fox management will not let anyone be seen as "attacking a 'rape victim'".
Hell, last night on of their legal talking heads was pushing for Ford to file charges in Maryland.
Unless you put out some effort, you will not hear any of the important details. You will only hear what the media tells you, and that if you don't believe a "rape victim" no matter what, you're a rape enabler or worse.
Correct me if I am wrong...but if they did do this...it would be the first instance of a step down a path wherein there are actual penalties for false statements, wouldn't it?
Bunk Moreland said:
****ing Grassley. Delaying again until Thursday is pathetic.
Is that official from him or just what her lawyers said?
Yes. But she's already on that path with her letter to Feinstein and when she testifies, under federal law.Squadron7 said:aggiehawg said:So that raises the question, why hasn't she done that yet? Surely her lawyers have talked to Maryland authorities just to check it out if there was such a possibility.Rapier108 said:One would think so, but Maryland is just slightly less liberal than California, so the AG would likely drag it out for months or longer, just to cause trouble. And just like old Ronnie Earl used to do in Travis County, he could have Kavanaugh indicted, even though he would know it would never go to trial.aggiehawg said:Her attempt to file charges would make news as the Maryland AG would be forced to go on record that there isn't enough credible evidence to proceed with an investigation.Rapier108 said:Fox is just slightly less unhinged on this than the rest.Burdizzo said:
WTF is up with Fox News? They have a poll on their front page claiming more Americans believe her than believe him.
Notice Hannity, Tucker, and Laura cannot really say much against her. They can say things like "presumption of innocence" and these claimed witnesses have said it didn't happen, but that's it. Fox management will not let anyone be seen as "attacking a 'rape victim'".
Hell, last night on of their legal talking heads was pushing for Ford to file charges in Maryland.
Unless you put out some effort, you will not hear any of the important details. You will only hear what the media tells you, and that if you don't believe a "rape victim" no matter what, you're a rape enabler or worse.
Correct me if I am wrong...but if they did do this...it would be the first instance of a step down a path wherein there are actual penalties for false statements, wouldn't it?
FriscoKid said:Bunk Moreland said:
****ing Grassley. Delaying again until Thursday is pathetic.
Is that official from him or just what her lawyers said?
Officially announced by the committee. It resumes Thursday 10am et
aggiehawg said:Yes. But she's already on that path with her letter to Feinstein and when she testifies, under federal law.Squadron7 said:aggiehawg said:So that raises the question, why hasn't she done that yet? Surely her lawyers have talked to Maryland authorities just to check it out if there was such a possibility.Rapier108 said:One would think so, but Maryland is just slightly less liberal than California, so the AG would likely drag it out for months or longer, just to cause trouble. And just like old Ronnie Earl used to do in Travis County, he could have Kavanaugh indicted, even though he would know it would never go to trial.aggiehawg said:Her attempt to file charges would make news as the Maryland AG would be forced to go on record that there isn't enough credible evidence to proceed with an investigation.Rapier108 said:Fox is just slightly less unhinged on this than the rest.Burdizzo said:
WTF is up with Fox News? They have a poll on their front page claiming more Americans believe her than believe him.
Notice Hannity, Tucker, and Laura cannot really say much against her. They can say things like "presumption of innocence" and these claimed witnesses have said it didn't happen, but that's it. Fox management will not let anyone be seen as "attacking a 'rape victim'".
Hell, last night on of their legal talking heads was pushing for Ford to file charges in Maryland.
Unless you put out some effort, you will not hear any of the important details. You will only hear what the media tells you, and that if you don't believe a "rape victim" no matter what, you're a rape enabler or worse.
Correct me if I am wrong...but if they did do this...it would be the first instance of a step down a path wherein there are actual penalties for false statements, wouldn't it?
Except that it wasn't to Feinstein. It was to Aschoo. Is there, in fact, a legal difference, penalty-wise?
That, and until she actually walks into the meeting room and raises her right hand...
Please let their be a Gorsuch letter or pics of her with hashtag stop Kavanaugh signs protesting somewhere.
So Eschoo forwarded it on to Feinstein without Ford's knowledge nor agreement? Hard to believe that.Squadron7 said:aggiehawg said:Yes. But she's already on that path with her letter to Feinstein and when she testifies, under federal law.Squadron7 said:aggiehawg said:So that raises the question, why hasn't she done that yet? Surely her lawyers have talked to Maryland authorities just to check it out if there was such a possibility.Rapier108 said:One would think so, but Maryland is just slightly less liberal than California, so the AG would likely drag it out for months or longer, just to cause trouble. And just like old Ronnie Earl used to do in Travis County, he could have Kavanaugh indicted, even though he would know it would never go to trial.aggiehawg said:Her attempt to file charges would make news as the Maryland AG would be forced to go on record that there isn't enough credible evidence to proceed with an investigation.Rapier108 said:Fox is just slightly less unhinged on this than the rest.Burdizzo said:
WTF is up with Fox News? They have a poll on their front page claiming more Americans believe her than believe him.
Notice Hannity, Tucker, and Laura cannot really say much against her. They can say things like "presumption of innocence" and these claimed witnesses have said it didn't happen, but that's it. Fox management will not let anyone be seen as "attacking a 'rape victim'".
Hell, last night on of their legal talking heads was pushing for Ford to file charges in Maryland.
Unless you put out some effort, you will not hear any of the important details. You will only hear what the media tells you, and that if you don't believe a "rape victim" no matter what, you're a rape enabler or worse.
Correct me if I am wrong...but if they did do this...it would be the first instance of a step down a path wherein there are actual penalties for false statements, wouldn't it?
Except that it wasn't to Feinstein. It was to Aschoo. Is there, in fact, a legal difference, penalty-wise?
That, and until she actually walks into the meeting room and raises her right hand...
This is an absolute travesty for Kavanaugh to have to go through this. Shameful. We're headed for dark times.
Quote:
So Eschoo forwarded it on to Feinstein without Ford's knowledge nor agreement? Hard to believe that.
(I've been spelling it wrong. It is Eshoo.)
It would have been with her knowledge and (tacit) agreement....but purposely routed through Eshoo (no jurisdiction) to...and this is where the legal eagles come in...avoid a situation of making false statements to an actual member of the Judiciary Committee (Feinstein).
This is not my highest confidence scenario. I am thinking that Feinstein thought it was nothing but got dragged in by its existence being leaked.
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
Don't be redonkulous. That sort of thing would never be allowed.
If she intended her statement to be provided to the SJC, then it being actually delivered by Eshoo is irrelevant.Quote:
It would have been with her knowledge and (tacit) agreement....but purposely routed through Eshoo (no jurisdiction) to...and this is where the legal eagles come in...avoid a situation of making false statements to an actual member of the Judiciary Committee (Feinstein
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,082
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
But seriously, I wouldn't put it past some of these people.
aggiehawg said:If she intended her statement to be provided to the SJC, then it being actually delivered by Eshoo is irrelevant.Quote:
It would have been with her knowledge and (tacit) agreement....but purposely routed through Eshoo (no jurisdiction) to...and this is where the legal eagles come in...avoid a situation of making false statements to an actual member of the Judiciary Committee (Feinstein
Is there any part of the letter that has been made public?
blindey said:Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
But seriously, I wouldn't put it past some of these people.
And the democrats would defend it.
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
Serious question: Would it be legal or ethical to use the power of the NSA to investigate Ford and her attorneys, and whether her claims were legitimate? Could you argue that it was a matter of national security?Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
That's a negative, Ghostrider.VaultingChemist said:Serious question: Would it be legal or ethical to use the power of the NSA to investigate Ford and her attorneys, and whether her claims were legitimate? Could you argue that it was a matter of national security?Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
It didn't stop Obama and his administration. Just need a foreign connection, like Ernie Els or Seve Ballesteros.
I'm old school. Two wrongs don't make a right.VaultingChemist said:
It didn't stop Obama and his administration. Just need a foreign connection, like Ernie Els or Seve Ballesteros.
VaultingChemist said:Serious question: Would it be legal or ethical to use the power of the NSA to investigate Ford and her attorneys, and whether her claims were legitimate? Could you argue that it was a matter of national security?Prosperdick said:
I just need to know one thing...were they able to use Ford's letter, take it to the FISC and secure a title 1 FISA warrant to surveil Kavanaugh?
That would be the job of the media. Unfortunately we no longer have a honest or curious media. Now we get "news" stories like "all women must be believed" instead of a look at the facts or lack there of around all aspects of the accusation. Propaganda has replaced investigative reporting.
Flake has said he may challange Trump in 2020. If Kavanaugh comes out of this hearing "clean " then Flake will have to vote yes, otherwise he would never make it through the primaries.
So this guy, when he was 17, had that detailed of an accounting of every thing he did during the summer? What a dork!Quote:
Brett Kavanaugh has calendars from 1982 that his team says don't show a party matching his accuser's account. He plans to give them to the Senate.
This is why he's nominated for the Supreme Court and I'm posting on TexagsAggieUSMC said:So this guy, when he was 17, had that detailed of an accounting of every thing he did during the summer? What a dork!Quote:
Brett Kavanaugh has calendars from 1982 that his team says don't show a party matching his accuser's account. He plans to give them to the Senate.
AggieUSMC said:So this guy, when he was 17, had that detailed of an accounting of every thing he did during the summer? What a dork!Quote:
Brett Kavanaugh has calendars from 1982 that his team says don't show a party matching his accuser's account. He plans to give them to the Senate.
If this #MeToo crap continues, every boy in America better start keeping calendars.
AggieUSMC said:So this guy, when he was 17, had that detailed of an accounting of every thing he did during the summer? What a dork!Quote:
Brett Kavanaugh has calendars from 1982 that his team says don't show a party matching his accuser's account. He plans to give them to the Senate.
No. The Republicans finally opened the rule book and read rule 1.
"1. If you need facts and don't have them, make **** up."
I'm close to His age and I can prove that I was out of town for almost the entire summer between my junior and senior year.
That's not how it works...they keep the calendar copies under wrap and fully redacted and delay sharing a copy over and over without any backlash. Oops, sorry, that's what the libs would do...I'm sure he'll turn it over and as you speculated her memory will start to clear up and it will suddenly be late or early summer, or maybe even '83.Rapier108 said:As soon as her attorney gets a copy, they'll finally have the specific date for her to claim, and of course it will be on one which doesn't show where he was.Quote:
Actually that's her next step...she remembers it was '83 and Kavanaugh was 18, not 17....INDICT!!!!!
I can probably re-create most of my summers in HS (80-84). Not from a written calendar that I can produce (although maybe), but from (parents) travel records, payments for camp, knowing when I was working, etc.
They need to leak a fake calendar, inverting the dates he was available for Ford's sex parties. The Dems will pick one of those dates when they think he was in town, yet he can prove he was not.
Featured Stories
See All
Learned, Loved, Loathed: Texas A&M 38, New Mexico State 3
by Olin Buchanan
No. 15 A&M's hot start more than enough to run away from NMSU, 38-3
by Olin Buchanan
12 Key Statistics: Texas A&M 38, New Mexico State 3
by Luke Evangelist
2026 Texas A&M commit Trashawn Ruffin returns to College Station
by Jason Howell
19:50
2d ago
6.4k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United