Kansas Crimson

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:02 pm**

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:51 pm DC didn’t come out and say Ford’s memories were “invalid or shouldn’t carry weight,” but sure did cast a lot of doubt, and also imply she was the one who should be investigated?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:51 am Like I said, I'm up for an investigation. It just has to investigate the right people.

Up until last week, Ms. Ramirez couldn't even remember for sure if Brett Kavanaugh was at a party where something clearly traumatic happened to her. She admits to being blackout drunk and not remembering much else about the night in question. I'm not sure how one goes about investigating any of this, since -- as with Dr. Ford -- all of the witnesses named have denied any knowledge of events (in Ford's case, under penalty of perjury) and since the only corroborating "evidence" comes from an unnamed source who heard something sometime about someone. But if you have any ideas, you can certainly suggest them.

Otherwise this is patent partisan hackery.

That's stupid.

I never said any such thing. In fact, I have a long post elsewhere in this thread about how she deserves the presumption that she is both honest and earnest.

Moreover, if you read the the posts just prior to the one you quote above, you'll see that the antecedent to "the right people" is "with [Ms. Ramirez's] lawyers and those from the Judiciary Committee who sought her out and suggested that she 'reassess' her memories."

as always, this is a much better forum when we argue with what people have actually said rather what we believe (often incorrectly) that they meant. The only thing I said here about Mrs. Ford is that the witnesses she has named have all denied that they were witnesses -- under penalty of perjury.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:11 pm**

Ah ok. Yeah your tone was different in other posts.

It’s a bummer that politics is so ugly any more.

But at least this bored is worth some lulz.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:17 pm**

My objections to all of this being absurd have been with reference to Ms. Ramirez, whose story is so absurd even you can't possibly believe it.

I have said from the start that Mrs. Ford is not lying and should thus be afforded the opportunity to make her case.

Moreover, I wrote that "I'm not accusing Ms. Ramirez of anything other than allowing herself to used as a pawn in a very twisted game." The fact that I am now presumed to be "against the women" because I think the Ramirez story is absurd is further proof of the bias that exists with respect to this subject and that many of you would rather argue with caricatures than actual people. It's stupid and tiresome.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:34 pm**

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:45 am
ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:26 am Could you imagine how OuTrAgEd psych would be if libtards were trying to ram through a scotus judge instead of investigating credible allegations of assault?
That's the point. They are not credible by any reasonable standard.

I could have quoted this post or others like it. I understood it to imply that Ford's allegations "are not credible by any reasonable standard." I think that is very wrong so I spoke up.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:38 pm**

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:40 pm They have no credible evidence to back them up. They smack of ulterior motive. They are invalid.

Not having evidence does not make something invalid. Listen to yourself. You are letting yourself get carried away and this is just costing you credibility.
You won't have any trouble finding studies that show that when people make accusations of sexual abuse after decades, they aren't making stuff up.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:43 pm**

So, don’t know why the Dems are so bent out of shape. Once the Kav gets on the Supreme bench they can just impeach his ass right? LOL!
Damn, the consequences of those elections. I believe it was Obummer that implied that.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:47 pm**

One party is requesting an investigation, the other party is interviewed on Faux News.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:03 pm**

DrPepper wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:38 pm
HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:40 pm They have no credible evidence to back them up. They smack of ulterior motive. They are invalid.
Not having evidence does not make something invalid. Listen to yourself. You are letting yourself get carried away and this is just costing you credibility.
You won't have any trouble finding studies that show that when people make accusations of sexual abuse after decades, they aren't making stuff up.

Memories are malleable and subject to suggestion. The whole notion of "recovered memories" is highly suspect in and of itself. Even the most vivid of memories degrade and re-form multiple times in the span of just a few months, much less 36 years. Add in her animosity toward both Kavanaugh and Trump and it doesn't pass the smell test, and it is certainly not worth holding up something this important.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:22 pm**

These 3 women are liars.

Just like those "so called" climate scientists...

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:37 pm**

DrPepper wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:34 pm
HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:45 am
ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:26 am Could you imagine how OuTrAgEd psych would be if libtards were trying to ram through a scotus judge instead of investigating credible allegations of assault?
That's the point. They are not credible by any reasonable standard.
I could have quoted this post or others like it. I understood it to imply that Ford's allegations "are not credible by any reasonable standard." I think that is very wrong so I spoke up.

Fair enough.

There are some posts I tend to block out as being outside the realm of reasonable discussion.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm**

Geezer wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:47 pm One party is requesting an investigation, the other party is interviewed on Faux News.

That's not true and you know it.

Or at least I hope you know it.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm**

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:22 pm These 3 women are liars.

Just like those "so called" climate scientists...

3?

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:41 pm**

Yeah...3 accusers...

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:47 pm**

Ok. I'm missing one.

I have Ford, who has agreed to testify under oath; Ramirez who has said that there is no way in hell she will testify under oath; and...?

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:49 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... misconduct

Of course...she is probably a trojan horse, created in a Soros lab...just like the others

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:57 pm**

The 2020 Democratic presidential nominee got 4chan scammed?

He denies it, but he promised proof and names in "48 hours" 48 hours ago.

I'm hoping.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:29 pm**

Would believe the college girl if she described his penis as oddly shaped, say, like a toadstool on the smallish side?

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:32 pm**

Leawood wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:29 pm Would believe the college girl if she described his penis as oddly shaped, say, like a toadstool on the smallish side?

LOL

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:37 pm**

Leawood wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:29 pm Would believe the college girl if she described his penis as oddly shaped, say, like a toadstool on the smallish side?

I wonder how Melania took the news?

She has seen that ugly little thing at least once.

Posted: **Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:47 pm**

The stories about Dr. Ford don't mention that she had recovered memories, only that she discussed it in therapy much later than when the assault happened.

Kansas Crimson

Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...

Re: Kavanaugh accuser in a nutshell...