Random Politics & Religion #34

You missed the third headline that Ventry a former CRC had to resign from Grassley’s office due to sexual harassment allegations hounding him.

You know what he’s lacks? The scent of yeti mushroom semen on this breath.

Care for a mint?

Strike three.

So far every witness supports the guy.

Having said that, why does FFXIAH support pedophiles and their disgusting habits.

Saevel, the "witness" Ravael linked does not support Kavanaugh. She merely doesn't remember being at the party.

And why should she? It was just another drunken high school party and no one tried to rape her.

I am positive that if no one tried to rape Dr. Ford at that long ago party she wouldn't remember it either.

Which is supporting Kavanaugh because he denies any party took place in the first place.

So like I said, why do you support pedo rapists?

I do not support Kavanaugh who is not a pedo. I have no idea if he actually succeeded at rape with another woman.

Then why are libs so quick to say he did? No one knows what the hell happened. For all we know nothing happened and she is making it all up.

You support Shiroi who is a pedo rapist as he has yet to provide any evidence that he didn't rape those children.

So far everything says she is either making it up or incredibly mistaken. Nobody and nothing has corroborated her story while multiple people have corroborated Kavanaugh. But his word doesn't count because he has a penis and due to said penis he's guilty of all accusations made my anyone without a penis.

The Dem's are even arguing due process shouldn't apply to him because he's has a conservative world view.

So far the majority of what you’re referring to has been debunked. Grassley’s (the head of the Senate Judiciary committee) own office has been exposed attempting a smear campaign against Dr.Ford. That has even led to one of the conspiring aides resignation after their past came to light.

It’s apparently successful since you’re regurgitating fabricated points they were peddling.

On top of that, it’s now known that before Fords accusations came to public light that Grassley’s aide Wendhal was researching her LinkedIn profile.

Why would they be preemptively researching her before Feinstein let the cat out of the bag? Could it be it was something they were worried the public finding out about?

Even though hindsight is 20/20 what could it have been and why? We all know that answer now.

We’ll find out what’s what, Thursday when she appears before the committee.

Huh what are you smoking... stop reading Slate it's like Infowars only worse.

Every person that she said was there has said they have no idea what she's talking about and don't remember anything of what she's saying. Kavanaugh's story is that he has no idea what she's talking about and doesn't remember attending any party with her or having even known her. Thus all evidence points to that party never existing in the first place, which supports Kavanaugh's story that no party happened.

There is zero evidence that any party even took place with the people she's mentioned, much less that any of those people had committed any action.

Every justice system tips one way or the other. Ours is tipped more towards protecting the innocent with the risk of exonerating the guilty. That is what the founders intended because they valued the people more than the government.

When you look at the justice systems run by dictators, they are practically always tipped towards punishing the guilty with the greater risk of falsely convicting the innocent. This is what dictators prefer because they value their own protection over that of the people's.

When people look at the Kavanaugh case, they see a man whose only evidence against him includes bits and pieces of highly circumstantial evidence, conspiracy theories, and one actual testimony. One singular testimony that is low on details, full of inconsistencies, and not even remotely corroborated by the accuser's own "witnesses".

It seems rather clear that the people who want to see Kavanaugh destroyed by this one shaky testimony have pretty much declared that they prefer a justice system where political expedience takes precedence over the protection of the innocent. That's what worries me the most.

I wouldn't even call it highly circumstantial, nothing here would survive an request for dismissal from the lowest paid defense lawyer in the country. There isn't even enough to justify a search warrant, much less arrests or anything remotely resembling a crime. It's not even he said she said, it's she said they said because we got at least three others agreeing with Kavanaugh that no such party took place.

This is pure character assassination by people like Zero and Chanti, zero evidence, zero proof, nothing except one person's story that has already been discredited. Many people, who the accuser has said were present, have sworn statements, meaning they are open to perjury charges, that this party never happened. It was finished the moment that happened. She's a liar and was hoping the #MeToo movement would be enough to pressure Kavanaugh to reascend his acceptance of the nomination.

The use of the term "highly circumstantial" was simply me giving the benefit of the doubt. I try to avoid absolutes, even when "zero" and "nothing" are quite reasonable descriptions....

That being said, there isn't anything that would remotely hold up in court, so character assassination is the only remaining course of action for politicians and desperate activists.

Whatever you say boys, you’re in a bubble if you find the Washington Examiner to be the bastion of “neutral” political reporting.

Ps try not dismissing references to a source like Slate when NBC,ABC, CBS and Fox are reporting to contrary of what you’re asserting.


Oh yeah she wants the FBI to investigate her claims while Kavanaugh does not. Who does that if their lying? Just something else for you to think abou and smugly dismiss. Sure sure Democratic Deep state; but, if you truly believe that then your objective take on reality is “highly” suspect.

Clearly you know nothing of Kavanaugh’s political background experience or you’d realize how stupid that sounded.

What the .....

English do you speak it!

You need to share whatever it is your smoking man...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/senate-democrats-investigate-a-new-allegation-of-sexual-misconduct-from-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez


A new challenger has entered the arena.

Hmm is it the establishment of a pattern or a lol well timed hit job?

LMFAO

Keep getting your hopes up dude.

Oh and look a third:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044013350873489409

We know he hasn’t been wrong yet.

*** be coming at of the wood work. This is not looking good for this Kavanaugh guy.

Riight...

Keep hoping dude, keep hoping.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MDemforce/status/1044025402375602176/photo/1

That’s from the New Yorker article too; since you won’t bother reading it.

Then you got Judge Elizabeth Rasor claiming that Mark Judge is straight up lying.


Might want to consider abandoning ship.

So, your counter argument against claims of uncorroborated, weak accusations with no evidence to back them, is to share even more uncorroborated, weak accusations with nothing to back them.

I appreciate you making this easy on us, I really do.

They all have the exact same pattern, something bad happened at some non-specific time in a non-specific location but they were kinda drunk and can't remember the specifics yet absolutely remember that Bret did the bad thing. ***like that doesn't even warrant an investigation by a local police department.

It's impossible to prove a negative. Which is what people like Zero are demanding.