Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Question


Westside Steve

Recommended Posts

I don't know that anyone here believes dr. Ford or seriously wants the FBI investigation to go forward. But if you do what in fact do you expect, or hope for, the investigation to show you? And if her accusations remain  unverified would you support her being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Why or why not?

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dims only saving grace is to try and string this out until the midterm elections, and hope they take control of the Senate.

Lets face facts, the longer they play this out the more bullsh!t they can throw around.

After the FBI investigation, and they don’t find anything on Kavanaugh, they still won’t vote for him.

They should’ve just had the vote today, and put an end to this circus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just because the fbi investigated him before doesnt mean they got to talk to the people making the accusations now. Thats a false narrative being spread by kavanaugh and the repiblicans.

I not only want them interviewing his friends, i want them interviewing his accusers friends. If " any" of his accusers are found to be duplicitous its off to jail. Same for him. People from yale are coming forward today saying he's lying through his teeth claiming he never drank to excess. And that was pretty obvious to anyone who knows anything about growing up in the U.S. He did himself no favors with the semi choir boy act. Just admit yeah occassiobally i would get plastered, like most young men....but id remember running a choo choo train on multiole girls.

He just didnt pass the smell test, and the main catholic/jesuit newspaper agreed....they cut him loose today based SOLELY on his performance yesterday

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/top-catholic-magazine-revokes-kavanaugh-endorsement-after-‘illegitimate’-hearing/ar-BBNG4Mn?li=BBnb7Kz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the developments of the day.

If any of the allegations are shown to be true and Kavanaugh was lying under oath then Kananaugh is history... including removal from the DC Court of Appeals.

If the allegations are shown to be false and Cavanaugh was truthful in his testimony, then he should be confirmed 100-0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember Crime Story? 

the frustration as Mike Torello (Denis Farina RIP ) and his  Chicago Major Crime Unit  had in trying to pin down 

and convict Ray Luca ( Anthony Denison) and his bunch of hoodlums (read democRATS) at every turn  by managing to either dodge 

legal process to move on more crime sprees and its move towards taking over Las Vegas.

giving the left this latest "extension" in the name of "fairness" will come back to bite the r's

IF they do not vote on Kavanaugh THIS time next Friday.... ONE WEEK ONLY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

I'm happy with the developments of the day.

If any of the allegations are shown to be true and Kavanaugh was lying under oath then Kananaugh is history... including removal from the DC Court of Appeals.

If the allegations are shown to be false and Cavanaugh was truthful in his testimony, then he should be confirmed 100-0.

Should she then be prosecuted?

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Sexual Assualt allegations not being proved true is not the same thing as proving they were purposefully false allegations

except her story is full of holes. Her alleged witnesses are denying her story.

:"Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to the left, per the left.

nazis were above the law, too. The left is now going after conservatives like

the nazis went after the Jews.

the left has their own brownshirts as final leverage.

Being not guilty is not the same as "we wish and say he's guilty because of our fuhrer (read: "leftwing ideology"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

its interesting he hasnt taken a rebuttal polygraph

Those aren't admissible in a court of law for a reason. I personally know a guy who skated on one. What's more interesting is that she hasn't taken one not administered by Democrat operatives which has been said to be unreliable because of her supposed emotional state.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dems better be careful asking for an FBI investigation.

I’m sure there’s several things they’re going to look into...like Ford’s recently closed social media accounts.

Not to mention that big fat Go Fund Me account that’s currently sitting over $500k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Sexual Assualt allegations not being proved true is not the same thing as proving they were purposefully false allegations

If, and if is the key word, you support giving someone a pass for making false statements that can ruin someone's life I think that's a pretty fuked-up position.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

If, and if is the key word, you support giving someone a pass for making false statements that can ruin someone's life I think that's a pretty fuked-up position.

WSS

No, it isn't. 

Just like it needs to be proven that he committed this crimes, it would need to be  proven that she purposefully falsely accused him.

There is a middle ground in there where neither is proven in a court of law.

 

I know some of you on here have a hard time with things that aren't black and white though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

If they are found guilty hope there's jail time. Hey Woody would you feel the same way about a white supremacist female who falsley accused a negro of sexual assault?

WSS

I have no idea what you're even talking about now. I'm not sure what kind of "gotcha" you're going for. 

It isn't that hard to follow. A man not getting convicted of sexual assault in a court of law is not the same thing as proving the alleged victim made  up the story in a court of law. 

This isn't hard...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

except her story is full of holes. Her alleged witnesses are denying her story.

:"Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to the left, per the left.

nazis were above the law, too. The left is now going after conservatives like

the nazis went after the Jews.

the left has their own brownshirts as final leverage.

Being not guilty is not the same as "we wish and say he's guilty because of our fuhrer (read: "leftwing ideology"

You're insane btw

"Conservatives today are just like jews during the holocaust"

 

.....

if the blaze told you to stop breathing you'd drop dead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Should she then be prosecuted?

Prosecuted? If the investigation produces evidence that she "made sh!t up", then yes. A Grand Jury would likely indict and she would be tried.

That's how the process works.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

except her story is full of holes. Her alleged witnesses are denying her story.

:"Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to the left, per the left.

nazis were above the law, too. The left is now going after conservatives like

the nazis went after the Jews.

the left has their own brownshirts as final leverage.

Being not guilty is not the same as "we wish and say he's guilty because of our fuhrer (read: "leftwing ideology"

cal, what is it that drives you to win every race to the bottom?

 

First... holes. She has gaps in her memory of the event. This is common in PTSD cases. One of the principle symptoms is "intrusive memories", a/k/a flashbacks.

 

Second... "denying" is an interesting choice here. How can someone deny they did not see an event at a party on an unknown date at an unknown time in an unknown place?

Your "denials" take the form of "I do not recall". Which is not an explicit denial. The exception to this point is Mark Whats-his-face. We'll see if that denial holds up.

 

Third... everything else is pure garbage and not worth addressing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Canton Dawg said:

Last I heard, Roy Moore’s accusers are being sued.

True... but then I read it in the NYT so it could be fake news.

Also true...one of his accusers filed suit against him first making his in this one case a countersuit...

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2018/03/judge_denies_roy_moores_reques.html

I found nothing about him suing the mall that banned him...

9 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

If they are found guilty hope there's jail time.

Ummmmm... that's not how civil suits work, Steve.

I edited out the garbage in your case.. You are welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Canton Dawg said:

The Dems better be careful asking for an FBI investigation.

I’m sure there’s several things they’re going to look into...like Ford’s recently closed social media accounts.

Not to mention that big fat Go Fund Me account that’s currently sitting over $500k.

Go Fund Me's are illegal?

As for the social media accounts... how many death threats, how much vitriol would you subject yourself to before cancelling them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Go Fund Me's are illegal?

As for the social media accounts... how many death threats, how much vitriol would you subject yourself to before cancelling them?

Who said Go Fund Me’s are illegal?

Let’s just say if the FBI uncovers some large contributions from Feinstein or Maxine...it wouldn’t be flattering.

While we’re talking about flattering, the mini FBI investigation its going to uncover some not no nice things about Ford.

Kavanaugh has already been investigated like 5 or 6 times, I would be surprised if they found anything on him.

Like I said in another post, it doesn’t matter if the FBI comes up clean...the Libs won’t vote for him regardless (can you say sham?).

Ford didn’t cancel her social media accounts, she just changed her name, but her new handle didn’t remain a secret for long.

And to answer your question regarding how many death threats did she receive? I would guess about half as many as Kavanaugh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

First... holes. She has gaps in her memory of the event. This is common in PTSD cases. One of the principle symptoms is "intrusive memories", a/k/a flashbacks.

Second... "denying" is an interesting choice here. How can someone deny they did not see an event at a party on an unknown date at an unknown time in an unknown place?

Your "denials" take the form of "I do not recall". Which is not an explicit denial. The exception to this point is Mark Whats-his-face. We'll see if that denial holds up.

 

Third... everything else is pure garbage and not worth addressing.

Great! now when can we all expect our tax dollars at work back! man i hope they find out who filled up this broken down Ford..Carry on..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Go Fund Me's are illegal?

As for the social media accounts... how many death threats, how much vitriol would you subject yourself to before cancelling them?

The legal system probably needs to take a look at some of the Go Fund Me accounts:

LAW PROFESSOR JONATHAN TURLEY CRITICIZES GOFUNDME FOR ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PURCHASE LEGAL TESTIMONY

https://dailycaller.com/2018/08/27/gofundme-legal-testimony-purchase/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

cal, what is it that drives you to win every race to the bottom?

Tour, what drives you to to bitch about a good point being made? What I posted, contrary to what you posted...is TRUE.

Items 1 - 22 of 22 - For example, collective character assassination, as a form of summary punishment, was practiced by the Nazi regime to discredit the Jewish ..

****************************************************************

First... holes. She has gaps in her memory of the event. This is common in PTSD cases. One of the principle symptoms is "intrusive memories", a/k/a flashbacks.

her "gaps" are pretty profound. She has no idea who drove her to the party? No idea who drove her home? The people she said were there, say no such event happened at all? never did happen? Then she says they left the upstairs and she heard them conversing with others at the party, then said she "knows" they did because she guesses that they did?"  and she has every poltiical motive to lie? NEVER mentioned Kavanaugh all these freaking years until he was in the last three list of nominees, and the most obvious nominee? PTSD - pretty little whiney voice? did you listen to the body language expert ridiculing her performance? no tears for your fake "PTSD" ? But go ahead and "know" you WANT her story to be true. That is what is really scum-bucket low.

 

Second... "denying" is an interesting choice here. How can someone deny they did not see an event at a party on an unknown date at an unknown time in an unknown place?

They denied it ever happened EVER. It never happened. NEVER. Doesn't matter about unknown time or place. It never happened. You really don't understand that? Sad.

Your "denials" take the form of "I do not recall". Which is not an explicit denial. The exception to this point is Mark Whats-his-face. We'll see if that denial holds up.

  Legally, "I do not recall" is a nice way of saying your new heroine Phoney Ford is a liar. Nobody, not one person, even her closest friend from back then, remembered ANYTHING about what she was saying. and, Ford said her parents lived close to the party. LIE. Eight miles is not close.

 

Third... everything else is pure garbage and not worth addressing.

Tour translation: "I want to give Ford great big smoochies for destroying Kavanaugh's life and family with grief, because I support the liberals and I love ROE vs WADE"

   Your support of this farce is tragic. With ZERO EVIDENCE, she has ruined an excellent man's life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2018 at 5:36 PM, Westside Steve said:

I don't know that anyone here believes dr. Ford or seriously wants the FBI investigation to go forward. But if you do what in fact do you expect, or hope for, the investigation to show you? And if her accusations remain  unverified would you support her being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Why or why not?

WSS

This was a mistake by Dems. Rosenstien likes Kavanaugh. The FBI is only going to interview those who already have no knowledge of this nonsense. Under an FBI investigation the press and Dems are going to have to shut up.

I predict they wrap this up and even some Dems will vote for the judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

No, it isn't. 

Just like it needs to be proven that he committed this crimes, it would need to be  proven that she purposefully falsely accused him.

There is a middle ground in there where neither is proven in a court of law.

 

I know some of you on here have a hard time with things that aren't black and white though

You really don't have to go down the playing stupid path every time and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about. If alleging sexual misconduct is not that big a deal to you even if it has extreme negative effects on a man's life then I think your position is fuked up. I gave you the example of a black man being accused of rape or something similar by a woman who is an outspoken racist and he loses his job and or does jail time. You wouldn't think she should be prosecuted for that? But it's okay if the accused is a white male?

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...