Kavanaugh Accuser Christina Ford Linked To Big Pharma Abortion Pill Maker

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It's the mistaken identity that I think is dumb.

I'd sooner believe that she was out right lying than I would believe there was a kavanaugh look a like.

That story about a look a like I believe is the rights way of muddying the waters.

There are things here that do not add up and things that are being pushed because of agendas. If you cannot see the political motivations at play here then you are either blind, or absolutely biased.

some things to remember when looking at this.

#1.You are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty in this country no matter how loud the media screams otherwise.

#2. The burden of proof rest on the accuser, not the accused.

#3. The MOTIVATIONS of all involved must be investigated. (Especially when politics is involved)

#4. Scrubbing ones internet history is suspicious enough. (what is there to hide here. rest on your own laurels for good or
for ill. Hiding your past makes any stories about your past suspect to increased scrutiny. It makes people wonder what
exactly your hiding about yourself and why.)

I can only speak of experiences but My Ex was raped and molested on multiple occasions.
She remembers the time because the clock was the only thing she could focus on...to the point that I had to get a new clock with different color Numbers because of the red numbers a constant reminder of what happened. Every year around the same dates the same emotional patterns would occur. as her rape and molestation dates drew closer and closer each year she would withdraw more and become more angry,and depressed until about a week or 2 after it.

Everyone experiences trauma differently this I know and understand.
But Trauma is hard to forget and often has triggers that bring it to the forefront.

I am not saying I do not believe this woman. But all this does stink of political game.

To me I ask myself. Which is the more plausible. At the moment I am very skeptical mainly because of the timing of it all.

That skepticism was brought on by the fact that this was sat on for months (months to prepare and possibly coach)
for obvious political gain.

I would feel this way if the political poles were reversed.

a reply to: PainGod

Just because the accusations are politically useful does not mean they are not true. I feel sorry for Kavanaugh's family that they are forced to go through all this. I have no sympathy at all for Kavanaugh... if he did not know this would happen, he is an idiot, and if he accepted the poisoned nomination he lacks the judgement to sit on the highest court of the land.

a reply to: PainGod

#1.You are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty in this country no matter how loud the media screams otherwise.

In a criminal court of law, yes. But, that's not where we are. We are in the court of public opinion, and what's being evalauted is not Brett Kavanaugh's innocence but his fitness to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: PainGod

Just because the accusations are politically useful does not mean they are not true. I feel sorry for Kavanaugh's family that they are forced to go through all this. I have no sympathy at all for Kavanaugh... if he did not know this would happen, he is an idiot, and if he accepted the poisoned nomination he lacks the judgement to sit on the highest court of the land.

Why dont you feel sorry for him? hes accused with absolutely NO evidence.

I love how the left claim all this moral superiority.....you know people being discriminated against , blacks being accused of crimes they didnt commit with no evidence by white people etc etc......

But here is a person who is quite literally being destroyed, with NO evidence, from another white person, and you guys are effing mum on the whole thing other than just believing the accuser.........youre no better than anyone you claim to rail against honestly........

Not only is there absolutely no evidence, everyone she has named as a witness has denied the incident occurred........yet, you feel no sympathy.....

You know why? because youve let your political affiliation supersede your morals..........

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


The victim's testimony is evidence. Do you think she's lying?

a reply to: DJW001

No, you're an idiot for doing what the MSM and Liberal entertainers are doing....convicting him of a crime without due process and completely ignoring the fact, that in this country we are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. By the way, where is the outrage at CORY BOOKER who's still on the Senate, even though he admitted to trying to grope the breast of a girl? Is it because he's a Democrat and the Liberal press, including people like you, are giving him a free pass?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


The victim's testimony is evidence. Do you think she's lying?

Yes, I think she is lying.
The onus is on her to prove what she has claimed is true.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


The victim's testimony is evidence. Do you think she's lying?

No its not evidence.......not in a court of law not anywhere, its just testimony, you clearly dont now how courts or "evidence" works

but feel free to provide any evidence thats been released thus far.........

Ill hold my breath

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


The victim's testimony is evidence. Do you think she's lying?

Until she gives her sworn testimony under oath...there is no official testimony evidence. Currently, there has only been rumor and allegations...not testimony.

Thus, at this point we do NOT even have that as evidence. Only evidence is that all others that were named Ford as witnesses have given sworn testimony and they all did not corroborate her allegations.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: CynConcepts

She didn't give out the names to her therapist in 2012.

Innocent until proven guilty should apply both to kavanaugh and christina.

What are you talking about?
Dr Ford is not being asked to prove her innocence, she is being asked to prove that her allegation are true.
It is only important, and right, that we presume Kavanaugh is innocent at this stage.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

That has to be be one of the dumbest things I've read on this thread. So, you're telling me that the truth doesn't matter...only what the public believes is true. A person's "fitness" to serve in our government is based on character and integrity, that are based on a person's actions. These actions are based on TRUE FACTS. To smear a person's character based on a unproven accusation IS NOT what we do in this country! So explain to me then, how Cory Booker still remains a Senator after ADMITTING to groping the breast of a 15 year old girl? Where's the "court of public opinion" on this FACT? How the heck is Cory Bookers "fitness" to serve on the Senate floor still viable?

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


LOL

If testimony isn't evidence, how do we know about Kavanaugh's upstanding character? Why do you belive Kavanaugh's allies "evidence" but not his accuser's "evidence"?

Testimony evidence is a legal term that refers to written or oral statements used as evidence in a criminal or civil trial. There are many different ways that testimony evidence is used in a trial, including as an account of a crime or as an expert opinion on an aspect of the trial. In most regions, testimony evidence must be gathered and presented according to strict legal guidelines or it is subject to dismissal from the court's consideration.

Eyewitness testimony evidence is often important to a trial as it is usually a form of direct evidence. An eyewitness is a person that saw a crime occur in person, and thus may be a valuable source of gathering facts about the situation. As direct evidence, eyewitness testimony is considered a factual account of a crime without inference, assuming the witness is telling the truth.

www.wisegeek.com...

Evidence given in the form of testimony is perhaps the most basic type of evidence. Testimonial evidence consists of what a competent witness at the proceeding in question says in court.

evidence.uslegal.com...

a reply to: shawmanfromny

That has to be be one of the dumbest things I've read on this thread. So, you're telling me that the truth doesn't matter...only what the public believes is true.

What does "truth" have to do with the "presumption of innocence"?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: CynConcepts

She didn't give out the names to her therapist in 2012.

Innocent until proven guilty should apply both to kavanaugh and christina.

What are you talking about?
Dr Ford is not being asked to prove her innocence, she is being asked to prove that her allegation are true.
It is only important, and right, that we presume Kavanaugh is innocent at this stage.

You mean she's being asked to prove that she's not a liar.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


The victim's testimony is evidence. Do you think she's lying?

100%. She is a lying liar.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does anyone really think that abortions will become illegal? I see around a 0% chance of that ever happening.

That's just the excuse they give to muster the SJW's emotional outcries...

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Evidence given in the form of testimony is perhaps the most basic type of evidence. Testimonial evidence consists of what a competent witness at the proceeding in question says in court.

So are you implying that all testimony from a witness IS TRUE? This is why we DON'T CONVICT people based on testimony from anyone in the "court of public opinion." Testimony that's TRUE is what counts as factual evidence. You are REALLY reaching here to back up your nonsensical statements!

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: CynConcepts

She didn't give out the names to her therapist in 2012.

Innocent until proven guilty should apply both to kavanaugh and christina.

What are you talking about?
Dr Ford is not being asked to prove her innocence, she is being asked to prove that her allegation are true.
It is only important, and right, that we presume Kavanaugh is innocent at this stage.

You mean she's being asked to prove that she's not a liar.

No, she is not being asked to prove she is not a liar.. She's being asked to back up her statement with facts. If you were accused a sexually assaulting someone wouldn't you demand proof in a court of law?

Comments like you made, make me glad I haven't been accused of a crime that will require a jury of my peers to decide my fate. My fear would be I would get a bunch that have no logic or reasoning skills and an inability to understand the law. I have read so many comments in this thread that lead me to believe their may be lots of folks like that.

a reply to: UKTruth

Dr Ford is not being asked to prove her innocence, she is being asked to prove that her allegation are true.
It is only important, and right, that we presume Kavanaugh is innocent at this stage.

Then why is the committee loathe to put the only other witness under oath?