Apparently, what happens at Georgetown Prep doesn't always stay at Georgetown Prep:
A former schoolmate of Ford's clearly recalls there being a buzz around school about the "alleged" sexual assault that Ford now accuses Kavanaugh of committing.
Apparently, what happens at Georgetown Prep doesn't always stay at Georgetown Prep:
A former schoolmate of Ford's clearly recalls there being a buzz around school about the "alleged" sexual assault that Ford now accuses Kavanaugh of committing.
You're absolutely delusional wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uJ6djc12l8Flagpole wrote:
The contrast between Trump and Hillary though is staggering. She is lucid. He is not.
johnny99 wrote:
Apparently, what happens at Georgetown Prep doesn't always stay at Georgetown Prep:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/accusers-schoolmate-says-she-recalls-hearing-of-alleged-kavanaugh-incident/ar-BBNzgE5?li=BBnbcA1A former schoolmate of Ford's clearly recalls there being a buzz around school about the "alleged" sexual assault that Ford now accuses Kavanaugh of committing.
I heard Hillary eats babies. Get Her!
johnny99 wrote:
Apparently, what happens at Georgetown Prep doesn't always stay at Georgetown Prep:
A former schoolmate of Ford's clearly recalls there being a buzz around school about the "alleged" sexual assault that Ford now accuses Kavanaugh of committing.
Confirmation that the rape incident was discussed 36 years ago by the women at their school. She even got stood up for her prom by Kavanaugh's pal Mark Judge who got blinding drunk before the prom.
Unfortunately, she was immediately forced into hiding by a gang rape of conservative media outlets attacking her credibility .
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DndC4ZEUwAA6LCw.pnghttps://mobile.twitter.com/LawrenceConnol2/status/1042375392768733190She has more witnesses wrote:
johnny99 wrote:
Apparently, what happens at Georgetown Prep doesn't always stay at Georgetown Prep:
A former schoolmate of Ford's clearly recalls there being a buzz around school about the "alleged" sexual assault that Ford now accuses Kavanaugh of committing.
Confirmation that the rape incident was discussed 36 years ago by the women at their school. She even got stood up for her prom by Kavanaugh's pal Mark Judge who got blinding drunk before the prom.
Unfortunately, she was immediately forced into hiding by a gang rape of conservative media outlets attacking her credibility .
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DndC4ZEUwAA6LCw.pnghttps://mobile.twitter.com/LawrenceConnol2/status/1042375392768733190
Do liberals not understand the precedence that this can set? Are you so stuck in your immediate world, to fail to see how this exact same set of standards can affect liberal politicians and nominees in the future?
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
Do liberals not understand the precedence that this can set? Are you so stuck in your immediate world, to fail to see how this exact same set of standards can affect liberal politicians and nominees in the future?
Al Franken. /EOS
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
Do liberals not understand the precedence that this can set? Are you so stuck in your immediate world, to fail to see how this exact same set of standards can affect liberal politicians and nominees in the future?
Liberals are displaying an astronomical level of delusion and mental instability. This is amazing on many levels.
Trumpers are displaying an astronomical level of delusion and mental instability. This is amazing on many levels.
In this letter, it says "if Kavanaugh has any integrity, he would stop dodging the allegations"
He wants to testify, you psychotic idiots.
In this letter, it says "if Kavanaugh has any integrity, he would stop dodging the allegations"
He wants to LIE about it, you psychotic idiots.
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
She has more witnesses wrote:
Confirmation that the rape incident was discussed 36 years ago by the women at their school. She even got stood up for her prom by Kavanaugh's pal Mark Judge who got blinding drunk before the prom.
Unfortunately, she was immediately forced into hiding by a gang rape of conservative media outlets attacking her credibility .
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DndC4ZEUwAA6LCw.pnghttps://mobile.twitter.com/LawrenceConnol2/status/1042375392768733190Do liberals not understand the precedence that this can set? Are you so stuck in your immediate world, to fail to see how this exact same set of standards can affect liberal politicians and nominees in the future?
What precedent? If you commit a sexual assault and then lie about it, you don't get to serve on the Supreme Court? I can live with that.
Your^^^^^^^ mental instability and inability to post anything of fact/substance, is fascinating. Your psychopathy is truly amazing.
Flagpole wrote:
Doogie Howser wrote:
Hillary Clinton is a horrible person. She's not close to Trumpian levels , but a horrible person nonetheless.
She would have made a terrible POTUS. She was a poor Senator and a poor SoS. What makes anyone with half a brain think that she would have somehow been a good POTUS?
She is a flawed person, not a horrible person. She has never been found guilty of any of the things you Hillary haters accuse her of, and just yesterday I had to shut down an urban legend about her that was not true. Say what you will, but she is a brilliant person and understands the role of a President like perhaps no other who hasn't been one. As she is a flawed person, she likely would not have been one of our best presidents, but she would have been middle of the road...a big improvement from the chaotic disaster that is the Orange One. I remind you and everyone that I voted for her half-heartedly...but it was a vote I had to make because the Orange One is so unprepared, unfit, and criminal.
What she did to her husband’s accusers and her treatment of the Secret Service and her staff alone make her a horrible person.
She would have been down there with GWB fighting for the title of the worst POTUS. She was a poor Senator and SoS. Those facts are not up for debate. No way she would have been even a decent POTUS. Thinking otherwise is delusional.
That wasn't to you, johnny. The mimic poster.
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
In this letter, it says "if Kavanaugh has any integrity, he would stop dodging the allegations"
He wants to testify, you psychotic idiots.
johnny, this... wrote:
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
In this letter, it says "if Kavanaugh has any integrity, he would stop dodging the allegations"
He wants to testify, you psychotic idiots.
And what's your point?
I didn't accuse him of dodging the allegations, Cristina King did.
BK has said that this assault never happened. He's either lying or telling the truth. He says he wants to testify. If he does testify, there's still no guarantee that he'll tell the truth. So the fact that he wants to testify isn't persuasive on the ultimate question of whether he did it or not.
Obviously, we're all free to decide who to believe here. I'd like to let it all play out before making any judgments.
johnny, this... wrote:
#Icanwritestufftoo wrote:
In this letter, it says "if Kavanaugh has any integrity, he would stop dodging the allegations"
He wants to testify, you psychotic idiots.
While not allowing the woman her right to have the FBI conduct a proper investigation. And by refusing to allow her time to prepare to be interrogated by 11 middle-age and older, white male conservatives. And being called a liar by a long time judge, Kavanaugh.
Yup. He wants to "testify" on terms that favor him to allow him to better destroy her reputation.
johnny99 wrote:
johnny, this... wrote:
And what's your point?
I didn't accuse him of dodging the allegations, Cristina King did.
BK has said that this assault never happened. He's either lying or telling the truth. He says he wants to testify. If he does testify, there's still no guarantee that he'll tell the truth. So the fact that he wants to testify isn't persuasive on the ultimate question of whether he did it or not.
Obviously, we're all free to decide who to believe here. I'd like to let it all play out before making any judgments.
What Johnny this is refusing to comment about are are Kavanaugh's "terms" for testify. One-hundred percent in favor of him; he is already prepared. Zero percent in favor of her; she gets no chance to properly prepare, and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are refusing to ask the FBI to investigate a matter for a situation they never looked into.
Awsi Dooger wrote:
Not sure why my post got cut off.
To continue with the point, all of the midwestern states (plus Pennsylvania) that Trump won narrowly in 2016 had a conservative/liberal gap of 9% or less in the exit poll. That is a definition of a dependably blue state. No state with a 9% gap or fewer had ever voted red previously, in all the decades I've charted this.
In short, it was a one-time fluke. No ideology change. Trump would have to fare much better in 2020 to carry those states along. Hillary and Democrats screwed up in inconceivable fashion by taking those midwestern states for granted.
There is zero chance Trump could lose the national popular vote by 2% or nearby and carry those states again. More likely, he would need to win the popular vote by 2% or thereabouts.
And that’s the issue since he LOST the popular vote in 2016. He’s sitting at 38-42% approval right now. He hasn’t been over 45% (average of polls) since he won. His approval was the lowest at election in modern history. I’m just not seeing the math add up. The Mueller investigation is getting worse for him not better. The tariff battle is getting worse for him not better.
Two things could sky rocket his approval and this electability:
1. Exoneration by Mueller. Not likely. The best case scenario I see here is Mueller’s report shows those in his campaign and administration tried to conspire with Russia, tries to obstruct Justice, comitted various other white collar crimes but Trump has the Reagan excuse of “plausible deniability”.
2. China caves and works out a very pro-America trade deal. Not likely. Trump wants American companies making American products in America. That’s a nice but expensive sentiment, and much more of a long term strategy.
At this point he just doesn’t have the math.
Alan
In 1991, when Anita Hill’s allegations were made public, the FBI got involved at the direction of the White House.
^ This is a fact.
In 2018, Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) claims that the FBI cannot investigate this matter because it goes against protocol.
^ This is a fact.
in 1991, Orrin Hatch attacked Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas by claiming; she was coached by special interests, her story’s was too contrived, and her story was so slick it doesn’t compute.
^ This is a fact.
Bottom Line: Orrin Hatch is a fool.
