Kavanaugh Hearing

getting bad when you cannot count on your own best friend to back you up. With friends like that Ford does not need any enemies

 

Who corroborated it that was in the room that night?

 

I'm waiting for the inevitable Keyser interview with Tucker Carlson, where she details being told to change her story in the name of 'sisters stick together."

 

I don't know... the FBI didn't investigate.

I do know there were supposedly a few people coming forward who heard about it that day or the next, and one (the Priest guy) who had a specific reference as to a person who said they saw it happen.

If the FBI had investigated, then we'd know.

 

Her best friend specifically called out Kavanaugh for misrepresenting her statement on the stand.

She is to be commended for truthfulness in all aspects of this event. Not making claims she couldn't honestly make. Calling out false claims by Kavanaugh.

And if we agree she should be commended for her honor and truthfulness, perhaps her belief that Ford is telling the truth should carry some weight.

 

Thank you. I read the papers last night. They confirmed what I suspected, which that it would be mistaken to interpret those further from the zero line as demonstrative of extreme. As I commented above to @OklahomaGator , it's that the further away the the justice is from zero, the more consistent con/lib they voted in the cases that year, and vice versa, not that the justices themselves are more/less extreme.

@GatorBen made a terrific point about coherent judicial philosophy, suggesting (he can correct me if I'm wrong) that voting consistently along political ideological lines can reflect a coherent judicial philosophy. But I'd argue that voting inconsistently along political ideological lines can reflect a coherent judicial philosophy, but one that is more fluid in approach to different types of cases. Though we can't make these types of determinations from the graph itself.

 

TRANSLATION: What if, I mean what if... no really.. what if?!!?!!?!?

 

Ummm... No.

Ford is not calling Keyser a liar.

McLean's attorney is saying McLean never pressured Keyser.

This likely comes down to McLean claiming that whatever she said to Keyser was not meant to pressure her, in spite of Keyser feeling pressure. Both could be true, or it could be true that McLean intentionally tried to pressure her.

Ford does not appear to be involved in it. At least not directly.

 

The FBI interviewed the following ten individuals:

Ford Allegations

• The three individuals identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as having attended the gathering where she was allegedly assaulted. Mark Judge PJ Smyth Leland Keyser
• Mark Judge
• PJ Smyth
• Leland Keyser
• Two other individuals included on Judge Kavanaugh’s July 1, 1982 calendar entry. Timothy Gaudette Christopher Garrett
• Timothy Gaudette
• Christopher Garrett
• An attorney for one of the witnesses

Ramirez Allegations

• Deborah Ramirez
• Two alleged eyewitnesses named by Deborah Ramirez (a third alleged eyewitness refused to submit to an interview)
• Deborah Ramirez’s close friend from college

 

Translation. Reading is fundamental.

My post was very direct. Even a Nolie could understand it.

 

i thank it would be fair to say that McLean intentionally tried to pressure her I also tend to believe Ford left it up to her layers to call her a liar her

So now we are getting into another he said she said

 

I read that summary from Grassley earlier today.

We do not know what those witnesses testified to. We do know for a fact that people came forward to be interviewed that the FBI did not talk to.

 

Let me ask you something a Volunteer would understand. Do you really think the FBI would intentionally sidestep someone who was potentially a witness to Kavanaugh exposing himself? Do you really think the FBI would really ignore such a "witness"?

 

Do we know what McLean said/asked? What tone of voice or what type of "leverage" she might have tried to use?

It wouldn't surprise me at all if McLean intentionally pressured her, but answers to those questions would help lock that down if it did occur.

 

Yeh …. Ramirez is credible. Prototypical leftie anti-trumpster.

Neither The New Yorker nor The New York Times, which attempted to verify Ms. Ramirez’s story last week, were able to find witnesses acknowledging the episode. (The Times did not obtain an interview with Ms. Ramirez.) The New Yorker, however, reported that a fellow student, whom the publication did not identify, confirmed having learned of the incident — and Judge Kavanaugh’s alleged role in it — within a day or two after it happened.

Ms. Ramirez initially told friends she had memory gaps and was not certain that Judge Kavanaugh was the person who exposed himself, as she related to Mr. Roche and some other old classmates last week. But, after six days of assessing her memories, (LMAO … this means, after talking to her tremendously desperate liberal democrat handlers) The New Yorker reported, she said she was confident that Judge Kavanaugh was the man who had humiliated her.

and

Some of her closest Yale friends said they lost touch with Ms. Ramirez in the last decade. That was in part because she became more politically liberal and conscious of her Latino roots and no longer felt as comfortable among her Yale cohort, several friends said she told them.

Over the past 16 years, Ms. Ramirez, a registered Democrat who lives in Boulder, Colo., with her husband, Vikram Shah, a technology consultant, has worked with a domestic violence organization, both as a volunteer and in a paid position. She joined the board of the organization in 2014.

In a Culture of Privilege and Alcohol at Yale, Her World Converged With Kavanaugh’s

 

The FBI reached out to three people Ramirez identified as eyewitnesses and interviewed two of them (the third declined to be interviewed). They didn't find any corroboration for her allegations when doing so.

 

If Keyser does agree to an interview it's not going to be with Tucker Carlson. Much more likely a real reporter from MSNBC, CNN or one of the broadcast networks. Had a hard time deciding whether to rate your post "funny" or "come on man" since I wasn't sure whether it was intended to be facetious or serious.

 

Nothing there proves or refutes her claim.

Still points out that the FBI should have interviewed the witnesses who volunteered to come forward.

 

So three from a list of 20?

Deborah Ramirez lawyer rips FBI for ‘failure’ to interview corroborating witnesses

 

LOL ….. the banner ad across the bottom of THFSG was "Save Roe Now" …. a "send us money" advertisement from Planned Parenthood.