I am still blown away of this strategy of painting the nominee as a college party wild animal unfit to serve. If that were the case 80% of Congress should be out on their asses tonight.

It used to be that the Democrats would strike fear into women by claiming this appointment would guarantee all women would have to have unsterile coat hanger abortions in dark alleys.

The FBI cannot do anything in this case. This is not a criminal case against the Government. They can ask for statements but have no power to compel statements. Then they will compile all statements given and give them to the Senate. This is nothing but a stall. Nothing new will come from the FBI 302's.

aggiehawg said:

---

blindey? What do you think about scrubbing her social media accounts as destruction of evidence??

---

I'll be honest. I'm of the position that Ford is more pawn than principal. She may have been willing to try to derail confirmation on her own, but solo efforts would have failed miserably because it is very unlikely that she could memory-hole her entire online presence without assistance. With respect to the destruction of that evidence, the people that did the meaningful dirty work are the real bad actors. But as far as it being as prosecutable offence in and of itself, I'm a skeptic.

That said, I think the social media scrubbing says much more about the truth of the allegations and the credibility of the witness than anything.

Maybe they have "new memories" she has come up with. In either case, her testimony should be the standard to which the others should be compared so they dont need to interview her.

CJS4715 said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

Maybe I'm suffering from perception bias but the accusations that followed the initial Ford accusation seemed to me to weaken the Democrat game plan. The Ford story was serious but the others that followed turned the whole thing into a giant storm of flying monkey **** thus giving credibility to the R's claim that Ford was lying. With that, why would Harris release a letter that is obviously going to add to the **** storm? I know she isn't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree but a member of the Snook City Council would have more political savvy than this.

---

She released something that is a Avenatti-level... and she is a ****ing US Senator. Think about that.

---

Worse than CPL. His wasn't anonymous

Quote:

---

That said, I think the social media scrubbing says much more about the truth of the allegations and the credibility of the witness than anything.

---

And I think a case can be made that the scrubbing itself is circumstantial evidence of intent. As Trey Gowdy schooled Comey after the Hillary exoneration, there is more than one way to use circumstantial evidence to prove intent. You are likely right about her intent, she's a ditz and easily suggestible and was used badly by lawyers who most definitely did not have her welfare in mind but short of claiming she had no knowledge of her social media accounts being scrubbed until after the fact, that still makes her complicit. Not necessarily rising to criminal charges but complicit nonetheless.

But what about the attorneys and their motives for destroying her social media records? Possible consequences for them??

Where would one file a grievance against Ford's attorneys? California, D.C., Maryland?

Could anyone file the grievance?

VaultingChemist said:

---

Where would one file a grievance against Ford's attorneys? California, D.C., Maryland?

Could anyone file the grievance?

---

Where ever they are members of the state bar.

Why didn't Rachel Mitchell ask Chrissi Blowsey about the Scrubbing Of Her Social Media ?

Not sure if there is anything there, but Fords "lifelong friend" Keyser was a pro golfer and the Georgetown U women's golf coach before her health issues (I think I read it has something to do with a neck injury). Keyser was also previously married to Fox's Bob Beckel (maybe not significant).

Joe DiGenova made several comments about Ford's possible "connection" with PGA golfers and it not being good for her if they were to talk.

Interesting.

The health comment came off as petty and disingenuous in the hearing. I respect Leland a lot for not going along with her friend, which must have been difficult. She said she believed her, meaning she believes something happened but has no recollection and cannot corroborate. Very honest.

Agreed. I wonder if that means that Leland knows that something happened to her, but there's no way of knowing if it had anything to do with Kav. That would check out if Ford was extremely "active" during her high-school and college days like some rumors have alleged.

aggiehawg said:

---

But what about the attorneys and their motives for destroying her social media records? Possible consequences for them??

---

At this point, I think it would be with their respective state bars. But who knows how principled of an investigation that would be given the stereotypically left-leaning nature of those organizations.

To me it didn't sound like she knows per se-more like, You're my friend, I care about you, and I believe SOMETHING happened to you--however, I have no knowledge and don't know who you are talking about.


I could see someone from my sorority days approaching me and saying hey, do you recall this and I could totally say, I am sorry that happened to you and believe that you are telling the truth, but I have no memory of that, I am so sorry I can't help. That is being a friend but not lying.

Quote:

---

Not sure if there is anything there, but Fords "lifelong friend" Keyser was a pro golfer and the Georgetown U women's golf coach before her health issues (I think I read it has something to do with a neck injury). Keyser was also previously married to Fox's Bob Beckel (maybe not significant).

---

So she's a lefty with terrible tastes in men? Color me surprised.

drcrinum said:

---

---

Reminds me of this:

Hopefully now we can wrap this stupid thing up and get Judge K confirmed.

Agreed

I haven't seen this discussed but Graham discussed last night what would happen if they don't get the votes to confirm. He would recommend that Trump should renominate Kav and put it to the mid term election to let the people decide. I thought this would be a pretty good move because it would probably motivate the repubs to vote like never before. If the democrats block Kav on the first try it could cause the biggest red wave in history if people thought they could get a second chance to get the nomination of a good man through the door. If I were a democrat I don't think I would want to risk the backlash if Kavanaugh was not confirmed. I think this back up plan should get more noise before the first vote takes place.

FWIW: Graham thought he would pass on the first try.

Do you notice that it is primarily ugly women that ***** about misogyny.

where did my post go?

Sullys Guy said:

---

where did my post go?

---

First a post disappears.....then the perma ban.

Nice knowing ya.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/flake-on-sharp-and-partisan-kavanaugh-behavior-we-cant-have-that-on-the-court

Quote:

---

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said he was troubled by the way Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh behaved before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

"The interaction with the members was sharp and partisan and that concerns me," Flake said Tuesday at a Atlantic Festival event in Washington, D.C. while while discussing the way the judge defending himself against allegations of sexual assault.

"You give a little leeway because [of] what he's been through. But on the other hand, we can't have this on the court. We simply can't," he added

---

He was never going to vote for Kav. Now, he's claiming he's too partisan.

Prognightmare said:

---

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/flake-on-sharp-and-partisan-kavanaugh-behavior-we-cant-have-that-on-the-court

Quote:

---

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said he was troubled by the way Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh behaved before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

"The interaction with the members was sharp and partisan and that concerns me," Flake said Tuesday at a Atlantic Festival event in Washington, D.C. while while discussing the way the judge defending himself against allegations of sexual assault.

"You give a little leeway because [of] what he's been through. But on the other hand, we can't have this on the court. We simply can't," he added

---

He was never going to vote for Kav. Now, he's claiming he's too partisan.

---

He was accused by the committee of leading a rape gang. He was simply too partisan to take his lumps and bow out.

BTHOB said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

BTHOB said:

---

I am about 99% certain at this point that Kavanaugh will NOT be confirmed. Amazing, frightening, and sad what baseless accusations without any hard evidence can accomplish.

---

So you will give me what odds? 99:1? 9:1?

I'll take that bet.

---

Unfortunately, I am not the betting kind. I will be happy to eat crow if I am proven incorrect. But, I am about 99% certain that will not happen.

---

I'm now at 99.9% certain that Kavanaugh will NOT be confirmed. Democrats win this round. Hopefully, it bites them in the midterms. Absolutely disgraceful.

Why are all the posters that give certain or overwhelming odds "not the betting kind".

I smell leftie cash incentives involved in Ford's testimony- discreetly funneled in off-shore accounts. There should be an investigation of her finances after this "made for television" soap opera is over.

Why must someone feel compelled to "bet" after stating an opinion? I never understood that logic. People are free to disagree.