Kavanaugh Hearing

Didn't say it was.

 

Not sure what you mean. I’m sure she wasn’t making her story up - looked pretty emotional. I think it’s funny she doesn’t believe Ford but would expect others to believe her and doesn’t see the inconsistency.

And for clarity, her position was that she thinks something happened just not what Ford said happened. Brett couldn’t be involved so Ford has to be wrong.

 

They can "fully cooperate" through their lawyers, and I think that is what they will do. That is all usmcnole is saying.

 

He lied under oath. There is NO excuse for that.

 

That’s exactly what you did. You said his mom, wife and children were “reasons” to commit perjury.

 

Family values when you MAGA.

 

How about everyone of those people that said they would cooperate did so through their lawyers. It's easy to say all cooperate fully with the FBI when that statement is coming from a lawyer that knows the FBI will not have subpoena power. No good lawyer is going to open their client up to legal exposure if they can avoid it.

 

"Well, his mom and wife were in attendance--theres 2 reasons....and his daughters at home, a couple more...

Just sayn..."

Um, ya kinda did...

 

&

Nope. He said he couldnt think of ANY reasons for lying about alcohol, drugs n sex in high school.

I pointed a few out.

Never suggested those reasons would EXCUSE or justify perjury (noting further that i dont bekieve he committed perjury).

 

Maybe he did, not sure. But even if zo, dont think it amounts to petjury.

 

^^^wassamatta...y'all suddenly dont like nuance, and micro-splicing every little nuanced detail?

 

Micro splicing? I'm not so sure.

Definition of REASON

Definition of EXCUSE

Definition of LIE

Not exactly micro splicing. Especially considering the seriousness of the J Kav situation.

 

I had stated here last week that Dr. Ford's testimony at the hearing on Thursday was believable. After reading several excellent articles over the weekend, in addition to Rachel Mitchell's assertion Friday night that she would not pursue charges against Kavanaugh, I now find Dr. Ford to be unbelievable. Too many glaring inconsistencies between her therapy notes, her letter to Feinstein and her polygraph statements. Among many other inconsistencies. The "no go" from Mitchell is particularly damning and I would love to hear more from Mitchell as to why she said what she did. I suspect she noted many of the inconsistencies which have been illuminated quite nicely in the days following the hearing on Thursday.

 

This is from Mitchell herself. I hadn't seen this. A nice read:

In Memo, Outside Prosecutor Pokes Holes in Christine Blasey Ford’s Testimony

 

Any 50 year old woman who talks like a child is not believable.

 

When a prosecutor makes blanket statement like "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue this", that speaks volumes. Her reputation and career still very much at stake. Making such a blanket statement, in a written memo no less, is pretty bold.

 

Agree but her statements evidently don't carry much weight with the pub never trumpers and dems.

 

Question for all, especially lawyers: Dr. Ford's sworn testimony is evidence, correct?
I know this is not a trial, but, can Kavanaugh initiate a lawsuit for false accusations or defamation of character? If so...why hasn't his lawyers mentioned this? I think I know the answer....but response welcomed

 

You can lead a horse to water....

I read some excellent, unbiased analyses over the weekend. Her story and presentation has a lot of glaring inconsistencies and gaps.

 

It would be a wild goose chase and the farthest thing from his mind at the moment.