Ford - Kavanaugh Hearings 9-27-18

As I said, the devils will come out in the questioning.

She claims to not know who drove her home. Yet, this person was the one who supposedly came to her aid in a time of stress. The emotional charges would surely cement that fact as much as they did the attack itself.

She is lying about that polygraph... in the first place, a polygraph is not admissible in court; any attorney knows that. Secondly, one never... NEVER... takes a polygraph in a moment of grief, as it completely scrambles the results. Thirdly, as a trained psychologist she would surely be familiar with the theory behind, and therefore the procedure for, a polygraph... I would go so far as to say her training likely included demonstration polygraphs. Fourthly, multiple questions are needed, not just two, in order to establish a baseline.

I fail to see how she could have not known that the Senate offered to come to her in California.

Her frequent use of aerial transportation does not jive with her supposed fear of enclosed spaces, or with her refusal to testify earlier because she was afraid to fly.

She gave a convincing act at first, but that seems to be falling apart now. A good showing by Kavanaugh will knock this one out of the ball park and expose the lies. In any case, I see quite enough evidence thus far that, as a juror, I would have serious concerns about convicting anyone at this point.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Fallingdown

Nervous laughter.

She can't look concerned at this point.

a reply to: shooterbrody

are the 6 fbi background checks not enough?

Here's a whataboutism for you.

Were the 13 investigations into hillary enough?

originally posted by: Fallingdown
So far no tears just laughter and smiles. Correct me if I’m wrong but that doesn’t seem right when recalling such a “traumatic” incident

she did get choked up and seemed like she was going to cry in the opening statement, but that went away quickly

Democrats giving interviews in break - well statements really. All concluding.
Republicans not, respecting the process.

a reply to: amazing

originally posted by: UKTruth
- changed her story about hearing people downstairs.
- changed her story about who pushed her into the room
- home is 20 minutes drive away and can't remember how she got home.
- Democrats paid for the polygraph on the day of her grandmothers funeral and chose the polygrapher
- lies uncovered about her not able to fly.

Meanwhile not a single piece of additional information beyond the known accusations.

also, the person who gave the polygraph said it was 2 questions.

Ford keeps saying it was very long

also, when asked '' was it video/audio recoreded '' she fuzzed over an answer about being hooked up and scared and not sure what was happening... she didnt want to say yes - because then those video/audio would become evidence, but she didnt want to say ''no'' cause it would be a lie..
so she says '' i dont remember''

I'm sorry but if you are sitting a polygraphy you would remember if you were being video or audio recorded. because you are trying to be caught out in lies and you dont want to be on video lying.

total BS

she's lying

a reply to: scraedtosleep

He was not a child he was 17 years old.

Going by the new age for buying a firearm 17 is still considered a kid.

Now so far, it seems even dems such as coon have said mitchell has been very polite to ford.

Lets see if the reciprocate with Kavanaugh.

Hint, they wont, they will be vitriolic toward him

originally posted by: Grambler
Dems talking are just grandstanding, and a waste of time. Not getting to the truth whatsoever.

Nice of this dem to say he will do whatever it takes to get an fbi invetsigation.

Would that include question feinstein why she held on to this?

I to wish the dems were asking better questions instead of just trying to make christine feel better.

The reason the other two accusers are refusing to return calls is likely because they are still being coached by Democrats.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: Grambler
Dems talking are just grandstanding, and a waste of time. Not getting to the truth whatsoever.

Nice of this dem to say he will do whatever it takes to get an fbi invetsigation.

Would that include question feinstein why she held on to this?

I to wish the dems were asking better questions instead of just trying to make christine feel better.

I do appreciate they are thanking her. If she is telling the truth, she deserves that.

But yeah, I am more for getting to the truth, not grandstanding.

I think the rpeublicans prosecutor has been very respectful

The coke cola is a nice touch.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

That's not whataboutism.

That's a GD fact.

Kavanaugh was first nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President Bush in 2003. His confirmation hearings were contentious; they stalled for three years over charges of partisanship. Kavanaugh was ultimately confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in May 2006 after a series of negotiations between Democratic and Republican U.S. Senators

en.wikipedia.org...

Brett K became a federal employee in 2006.

The FBI did their usual background checks, and NOT a GD THING until this snip show.

a reply to: Elostone

Funny how everyone is saying she sounds completely credible. Except this group of trump sycophants.

A made up story may come together seamlessly but memory doesnt work that way and her corrections so far are to clarify details and to confirm when there is doubt like when she said that she could not say that Mark Judge pushed her into the room along with Kavanaugh because they were both behind her. That doesn't sound like shes lying. It sounds like she wants to be as clear as she possibly can.
I think that prosecutor the GOP hired is turning out to be a good questioner for Ford. I think they are wishing they had not agreed to her.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: Grambler
Dems talking are just grandstanding, and a waste of time. Not getting to the truth whatsoever.

Nice of this dem to say he will do whatever it takes to get an fbi invetsigation.

Would that include question feinstein why she held on to this?

I to wish the dems were asking better questions instead of just trying to make christine feel better.

They are actually not interested in what happened to her, if anything.
Their approach is to delay the nomination and win the PR war. That's it. Always has been.

a reply to: Grambler

Lets see if the reciprocate with Kavanaugh.

Don't bet on it.

The Democrats will make long winded speechs with ZERO substance.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I see quite enough evidence thus far that, as a juror, I would have serious concerns about convicting anyone at this point.

I agree
While "conviction" is not the goal here, she has not added any "new" information and she has "changed" details of her accusation in real time while testifying.
The statement made by her "lifelong" friend who attended the party with her to me should be the end of this discussion.
Unless kavanaugh confesses to groping her as a teenager I do not see this going anywhere.
I do not see any evidence for gop votes to flip and I do not see evidence to keep red state dems from voting to confirm kavanaugh.

a reply to: Sillyolme

No, 'everyone' is not.
Only your echo chamber.
She sounds like a liar, faking tears and has been caught out on 3 lies and two revelations that she was being managed by Democrats.