Ann King:
What support do you have for male employee sexually assaulted in the work place by female superior? When male employee reported the incident to management, male employee was terminated.

Just don’t believe her. Me2 is being used as a political weapon.

"It is very common for a sexual assault victim to keep an assault secret for years, as it is not uncommon to remember the assault years after it took place."

Ok Ms. King, is it common for a democrat socialist politician to withhold a letter/knowledge of the allegation for a month, until AFTER investigations have been complete on this candidate, before leaking to a newspaper? Wouldn't the nation have been better served if said politician had brought this up during the interview phase?

And Ms. King, let's talk about how the accuser can't name the place, nor the time, nor the approximate date of the alleged abuse? Is that common too? Or how about the number of witnesses have not only changed in number over the course of two weeks, but the witnesses named including the accusers BEST WOMAN FRIEND have all denied the abuse happened?

What about that Ms. King?

"Imagine sharing an intimate experience of sexual assault with the U.S. Senate and millions of television viewers."

Yep, and all because a Democrat politician decided to play politics with an extremely well qualified candidate.

BLAME DIANE FIENSTEIN.

"Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has exhibited extraordinary courage in coming forward with her accusation of sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, knowing full well that people would immediately attack her credibility."

People are not attacking "her credibility", they're attacking the EVIDENCE that she is showing. Right this second, there is ZERO evidence. All that she has been providing has been explained and, frankly DENIED by the very same people she identified as knowing, including, again, HER BEST WOMAN FRIEND.

"Judge Kavanaugh has denied the incident and the committee has not approved Dr. Blasey Ford's request for an investigation, which is standard procedure in situations like this."

Of COURSE her did. And let's talk about the "investigation" Ford wants. She wants the FBI to investigate, however, the FBI DOES NOT investigate these matters, they only investigate FEDERAL MATTERS. Has Ford asked the local jurisdiction where it happened to investigate the matter? If not, why not?

And further on this subject, do you know who would also say that the FBI does not have jurisdiction on these matter? While none other then former Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden. In 1991 he lectured Judge Thomas that the FBI would never draw a conclusion in these types of cases.

Oops.

This is smear politics at its worse and it is 100% political.

You and your ilk have done nothing but try and divide men and women, and I think you will find that this ploy (and yes, I said ploy) will come back and do the opposite of what you think it will.

Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and this will evaporate into the ether, and you will come up with your next target.

We know what you and the democrats are doing, you won't like the responses.

This is how you got Trump.

DKHSK: Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and this will evaporate into the ether


I agree it will evaporate after he is not confirmed. There is no chance he is confirmed.

Don’t think that Kavanaugh will be confirmed, either. There are just too many doubts about his past behavior.

But the problem for the Republicans here is that even IF they do manage to conform him, they still lose big time. Kavanaugh’s tainted appointment against the will of the majority of voters - a majority of voters who believe Kavanaugh’s accusers - will not be forgotten. And if Kavanaugh were to help overturn Roe versus Wade as many conservatives hope, it will be an absolute disaster for Trump and the Republican Party as large numbers of independents, including independent women, will turn against them.

@DKHSK : “People are not attacking "her credibility", they're attacking the EVIDENCE that she is showing. Right this second, there is ZERO evidence.“

Whoops! Time to school Dan again. Wrong, Dan. Direct, first-person, eyewitness testimony is admissible evidence in a court of law. People can and do get convicted of crimes based on evidence provided by personal testimonies in a court of law. You may not believe the evidence against Kavanaugh, but you can’t claim that there isn’t any evidence against Kavanaugh.

Here i are my 2 scenerios. He gets confirmed using democratic votes and Ford does not show up or he is not confined and GOP picks up 7 senate seats and outs up William Pryor from Alabama who easily wins confirmation.

Doug,

"Direct, first-person, eyewitness testimony is admissible evidence in a court of law."

Yep. You're correct.

However, in this case, the accuser made the mistake of saying that 3 men...no, 4 men...no...3 men and 1 woman, were there at the alleged event and ALL 4 denied it happened.

BOOM!

My belief is not required when the accuser changes her story many times, and the EYE-WITNESSES will not corroborate her story. It's self evident.

Study the facts of her allegations arm-chair lawyer. Let the adults talk now.

This is purely political.

Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

"There are just too many doubts about his past behavior."

SIX FBI INVESTIGATIONS.

100's of testimonies to his character.

I'm going to say it: I DO NOT BELIEVE THESE WOMEN.

This is a sham and their will be hell to pay for it when he is confirmed and when the Republicans retain the house and senate.

This saddens me greatly. Not because if the political & social turmoil it has stirred up Nor the fact a man & his family must endure this bizarre circus but for the fact that the "Woman's Movement" I once thought I supported & considered myself a part of has all but been reduced to a purely political and even militant wing of the democrats & socialist cabal in this country. What these young women are doing will undoubtedly set our entire movement back another 25 years & completely unravel the trust & credibility we have gained over the past few decades.

Let's be clear about the level of proof required here. This is not a criminal trial. The required level is not "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt". A nominee for the Supreme Court of the United States has to be a person of unquestionable integrity and judgement. If there are any doubts about the integrity and judgement of any particular candidate, then there are many, many other well qualified candidates in this country to choose from. The job of Supreme Court justice is too important to take chances with. None of us who are either "pro-Kavanaugh" or "anti-Kavanaugh" will ever know for certain whether he is really guilty of the accusations raised against him. But whether we believe Kavanaugh or not, we all know that this nomination is tainted and there will always be a cloud of doubt over him. It's time to thank Kavanaugh for his time and move on to the next candidate.

P.S.: BTW, a third accuser has come forward:
"Third Kavanaugh accuser comes forward saying she was victim of a ‘gang’ rape"
SJ Mercury News: Web Link

Some of the biggest blusterers in these comments who are screaming “no evidence” are also against an investigation, which would gather evidence. An innocent man, and those who support him, should not fear an investigation. It would ostensibly clear him, correct?

Passing six background checks does not mean someone has been cleared of all past misconduct. It is a search for red flags. It could mean Kavanaugh is an upstanding citizen, or it could mean he has successfully hidden his past predatory behavior.

If you only get your news from conservative sources, you are not getting the whole story. Some of the previous posters seem unaware of the latest news and emerging facts.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty- including " beyond a reasonable doubt ". One of the basic tenants of American justice system is that the Accused gets to face the Accusor which her lawyers do not want.
A real tragedy of this is that everyone involved has mishandled the matter several times.- and continue to do so.

Brad,

Kavanaughs guilt has been PRESUMED already in the media. IT's a shame, but thats where the democrats want to go.

"Parent"

1.) The accuser cannot remember the place.
2.) The accuser cannot remember the date.
3.) The witnesses the accuser has identified, including her best friend, have all said unequivocally that they do not recall being at ANY location during ANY time and having this allege party where the alleged abuse took place.
4.) The accused has gone through six investigations without the hint of impropriety. One of those investigations was for circuit court judge where this accuser had an earlier chance to bring these accusations up. She didn't.
5.) This judge at and earlier pointing his career ruled AGAINST her parents in a foreclosure case (alleged).
6.) The accuser has been given multiple chances to testify to the senate committee just like Anita Hill, but only THIS time does her lawyers try and change the process of investigation.
7. The Accuser continues to want the FBI to investigate, but fails to give any evidence for the investigation to follow. What do you expect them to do with this?

If you read all those and still come to the conclusion that he is guilty, then your just being political and there is no use for me to debate you any longer.

Doug,

"Let's be clear about the level of proof required here. This is not a criminal trial."

Let's be clear here genius.

There is no trial because there is NO EVIDENCE. The accuser made sure to get this story created so that there can be nothing but smear. Giving ANY details would set her up for a perjury trap since if she indicated time and place, his calendar could show a very different result. Can't have that, can we.

Not buying this for one second.

And note, what happened after Judge Moore lost in Alabama? All the howling for investigations evaporated into thin air. The strategy worked in that case, it won't work in this case and you've awoken the sleeping Giant again.

Have fun after the mid-terms, dude. I'm going to enjoy every second.

While we are on this most disturbing subject....why is nothing being done with the pervert sitting in the oval office ? What happened with the M2 Movement concerning him? They say No One Is Above the Law !! Clinton said he was innocent...he too lied on television in front of all the world. What makes him a good judge of character when he is no better than they are? They say that money talks......I wonder how many palms He greases before he gets on Twitter early in the morning? No wonder he has bags under his eyes! He is like a human hurricane....look at all the corruption he has caused. Hi Karen !

While we are on this most disturbing subject....why is nothing being done with the pervert sitting in the oval office ? What happened with the M2 Movement concerning him? They say No One Is Above the Law !! Clinton said he was innocent...he too lied on television in front of all the world. What makes him a good judge of character when he is no better than they are? They say that money talks......I wonder how many palms He greases before he gets on Twitter early in the morning? No wonder he has bags under his eyes! He is like a human hurricane....look at all the corruption he has caused.

If Kavanagh is guilty he's got to go. But do not forget that he's presumed innocent until proven guilty.
So far no evidence, right, only here say after 35 years, give me a break, looks like another Democrat witch hunt to me.

Pretend all this Kavanaugh stuff is true. FBI investigated him 6 times and found none of this. And yet they're leading a Trump/collusion investigation? FBI better hope all this is false, Jesus

Remember when everyone was all a-twitter regarding the polygraph test and how this was damnable towards Kavanaugh?

Web Link

She wasn't even asked a question regarding him.

Did you know this Ms. King, before you besmirched a good mans' name?

How about the rest of you jokers who claimed Kavanaugh guilty, even though all facts point towards his innocence?

I, for one, will enjoy a 5-4 conservative bent in the Supreme Court.

I will profusely enjoy when there is a 6-3 conservative majority when Trump gets to pick another in his 2nd term.

I will enjoy your tears.

Really appalled at the comments on here. All you clever posters: hands up who was sexually abused 36 years ago? Details are foggy but you don't forget that it happened, and it clouds every single day of your life.

I can't speak to this case, but I was abused 38 years ago. No one was convicted, I didn't tell anyone but if the POS was suddenly up for a job in the supreme court I would be at the FBI's door telling them about it.

Democrats and Republicans, give me a break. Please act like human beings and think "what if this was my daughter, sister, mother".

Doug, thank you for the common sense.

@survivor,

I totally agree.

I really hope this nomination goes down in flames. If nothing else, this nomination process will at least get people talking about a real problem that persists in our society. A problem that is pervasive in our culture. Women are harassed, assaulted, and raped by men who are too often protected by a system that is biased against them.

All these Republicans complaining about lack of evidence or "besmirching a good mans' name", just don't get it. This guy isn't on trial. He's trying to get a political appointment. He's trying to get lifetime appointment to the highest and most powerful court in the world. Appearances matter here. How this guy and his supports respond to Dr. Ford's and the other's accusations matters. If it is he said vs they said, believe the women. Too often, men, and especially powerful men like this guy, have gotten away with too much with the way they have treated with women. Something needs to give. A good start would be to Bork this guy!

BobB,

The “appearance” you speak of goes both ways doesn’t it? Kavanaugh has survived 6 FBI investigations, the most current leading up to this confirmation process.

He has a CLEAN (ultra-clean) history.

Now let’s compare this man to his accuser. Take everything I pasted above and tell me which “appearance” comes off as being believable?

I have sympathy for every man, woman and child that have experienced any abuse committed against them, but the place to handle those are in a court of law, not a court of public opinion.

Btw, why hasn’t this accuser ever filed a report with the FBI or the jurisdictional law enforce the office?

Gone are the days of “believing” an accusation. You have to prove it.

Sucks to have a constitution, doesn’t it?

The wildly misinformed faux viewers are at it again in P-town. It is political. Rethugs are trying to jam this guy through before November when they'll lose everything. Enough that they denied Scalia's replacement for 400 days while Obama was in office. Now this seat hasn't even been vacant for two months and they're crying foul. Patti Davis, Reagan's daughter just came out as a rape survivor 40 years after her attack. She believes Ford is absolutely telling the truth. I'd tell you to google her story but you won't anyway. And faux won't say a word about it so you'll never find out. What about men that report priests abuse 35 years later? You believe them? This man will not go to prison for what he did, he'll just go back to his current job of being a judge. It's not a criminal trial, nothing has to be proven. The content of his character is being judged. I managed to get through life without assaulting anyone. Is that too much to ask for in a supreme court justice? Choose a woman judge and you won't have this problem. The good ol' boys club can't do that thou.

I believe Ann King is knowledgeable about this subject; however, she is ignorant but all the background detIls in this investigation. She has no experience working investigations. Even the polygraph was improperly given. Two questions, and they weren’t even about Kavanaugh. I believe something happened to Ford, but Kavanaugh was not involved, and her comments actually support this. The sad outcome here is that a good man’s name and reputation has been hurt, and a woman, who more than likely may have been a victim, is subjected to ridicule all in the name of politics. The Democrats are shameful, and not surprisingly so.

That's rich! The shameless talking about shame. Bravo hypocrite!

Jake I'll go you one better: I don't believe anything happened to Ford. I believe this is 100% political.

Why?

Judge Roy Moore, that's why.

I predicted when he was campaigning that the democrats would try the same stunt with every high profile Republican candidate for any position. Roy Moore was completely innocent. The girl had even forged dates on his signature, but the damage was done.

We accepted it then, but no more.

Trump has come out strongly against these accusations, and surprisingly, so has Kavanaugh. Any other judge picked by some two-bit RINO president would have taken his name out by now, so its good this guy has stones.

I believe tomorrow will solve nothing and the vote will be done by Saturday. It will polarize both sides even more, but more importantly, I think its safe to assume that the Democrats just lost the independents.

Good.

Survivor, I’m thinking what if this was my son. We can’t automatically assume someone is guilty just because one person says they are with no confirming evidence.

What if it was your daughter?

@DKHSK :”It will polarize both sides even more, but more importantly, I think its safe to assume that the Democrats just lost the independents.”

Uh, huh.

“Fox News Poll: Record number of voters oppose Kavanaugh nomination”
Fox News : Web Link
- - -

I dont want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court based on his voting record. While I support Ford coming forward and agree she needs to be shown respect, I think before I can actually say she was a victim, I need to hear her testimony andf the same from the accused and all witnesses.

I think that there is an excessive concern for Kavanaugh here. Now this may sound a bit cold-blooded, but Kavanaugh’s position and feelings should really not be a concern here. What is of concern here is to find the best candidate possible for the Supreme Court, a candidate whose integrity and judgement is of the highest caliber without question or doubt. There was a story told by some retired general (may have been Norman Schwarzkopf) about the introductory meeting held for him and all other new 1-star generals. A senior general in charge of the meeting came in, looked over the crowd of new 1-star generals, and then told all of the new assembled generals not to think that they were anything special, that if they were all killed in a plane crash tomorrow the Army would quickly promote a fresh new set of 1-star generals in their place without even skipping a beat. It was a sobering but honest slap in the face to remind everyone that what mattered was the mission and the job, and that in comparison to the mission and the job that they were assigned to they were unimportant.

The same holds true of this Supreme Court appointment. What matters is the job and finding the best possible person to fill this very important job. How fair the selection process may seem to be to Kavanaugh or to any other candidate is unimportant. What matters is the mission of staffing the Supreme Court with judges who are without question or doubt of the highest caliber. As the senior general would have put it, “Kavanaugh doesn’t matter”. This isn’t about trying to be “fair” to Kavanaugh and trying to balance his testimony against those of his accusers. This is about trying to find the best possible Supreme Court justice without any doubt or question, and abiding by that mission means thanking Kavanaugh for his time and moving on.

@Rick,

If it was my son, I would say exactly the same thing.

Doug,

I like how Doug rails against Fox News...until they say something he agrees with.

"93% chance Hillary wins"

That's all you need to know about putting your 'faith' in a poll.

"If it was my son, I would say exactly the same thing."

So...wait...

BobB,

The evidence used against someone else's son is completely hearsay and in most cases, disproven by the alleged witnesses themselves.

Yet in this case, "Bork this guy!"?

Sounds political.

Wilma,

Kavanaugh doesn't "vote" on the bench. He rules based on precedent, law, and the constitution.

Which one of the three don't you like? All of them?

I'm genuinely curious.

@Robert Adam
“That's rich! The shameless talking about shame. Bravo hypocrite!”

I find you from your response you live the idea of hypocrite. Oh, by the way, after listening to Ford during this congressional
questioning I have come to conclusions: Old White Democrats made political speeches before each question, Ford’s mind is foggy and questionable, and she appears, with all her mannerisms, to be a nut.

The new "Democratic" strategy, if you didn't realize it already is gather a bunch of women to label all Republicans either: 1) someone who sexual harasses women or worse or 2) rapists/criminals.

We all know this has happened to the last Superintendent (he was a Republican) and the previous principal at a local elementary school in town.

This is shameful and I agree with Jake Waters. She seems completely foggy and questionable and with all her mannerisms, appears to be a nut. I can't help but notice very similar mannerisms to the women accusers that has done this sort of thing in Pleasanton.

All the sobbing for the camera, but not one tear.

Tells me a lot.

And you can tell that Mark Judge is being prepped for a grilling.

He will be subpoenaed, and he will tell the committee he doesn't recall Ford and that will be the end of that.

Shameful,

We've notice the playbook.

It will backfire.

@DKHSK,

It is political. We already have enough to go on. If it was my son (I have two), I would say Bork him. This is an appointment to the US Supreme Court. It is a political appointment. This guy will do just fine in his job as an appellate judge.

Let's say no to a abusers and rapists.

She claimed through her lawyers that her fear of flying was the reason she could not attend a hearing sooner, but then we learned from Ford directly in the hearing that she flies often, and that she flies often enough for her hobbies.

These two statement are polar opposite. One is a lie.

Which one do you think is a lie.

@Jake Waters--
What kind of nut? Almond? Walnut?

Would like to see you answer questions in that public arena about a traumatic event in your life.

BobB. So it doesn’t matter how people are treated as long as you get the political agenda you want? I worrry where this country is headed.

@DKHSK :""93% chance Hillary wins" That's all you need to know about putting your 'faith' in a poll."

I see. So what you're saying is that a claim of "93% chance that Hillary wins" means a "0% chance that she loses".

Thanks for that elementary lesson in probability, Dan.

@Rick,

No, it matters how people are treated, and women are treated badly when they accuse men of sexual assault or rape. Women are victimized a second time and put on trial themselves. We need to change that, and thankfully that is starting to happen.

Women are personally attacked when they come forward with accounts of sexual violence. Just look at what "Jake Waters" wrote. I sincerely hope his wife or daughter is never the victim of sexual violence.

I have sons, brothers, grandsons and I am dismayed to say the least that at some point in their futures, 40 years from now, some woman can come forward with an unsubstantiated claim and ruin their families, their careers and their standing in their communities with no evidence other than her word, which is shaky at best. Our country was founded on the principle of innocent until proven guilty and this principle protects us all, regardless of political affiliation. This woman has the right to be heard. She has had that right for 40 years and has chosen not to exercise it until now, which is suspicious in the minds of many people. She has a right to be heard; not a right to be automatically believed. I'm sorry to inform the arm chair judges on this comment thread, but just saying it happened is not enough. Kavanaugh says it didn't happen. Her witnesses say it didn't happen. Judge Ruth Bader Ginsberg said in a recent interview that her reaction to this incident is that it is "sad". She said it was not this way when she was confirmed and it should not be this way now. She said that what is being done now to this nominee is wrong. Dems and Libs, please put aside your politics and think about what's truly right. All of us will answer for what we have done some day; the wheel goes all the way around and it will come back to you; to all of us.

Just watched the confirmation hearing today. It is very clear that Christine Blasey Ford is lying. It is also very clear that Judge Kavanaugh is sincere and telling the truth. He must be confirmed. Me Too has been abused. It must be stopped before it is too late. Eventually, NO MAN will be "innocent" from allegations simply because of their conservative views. This is a Stalinist and fascist attack on conservatives. We must fight back with the full force of our being - otherwise we will literally be run into extinction by the hordes of hateful liberal hyenas.

@Well,

This isn't a trial, it's a job interview. This has nothing to do with proving guilt. You don't prove guilt in a civil trial and this isn't even that.

Watching this thing today.....this guy's completely unhinged and disrespectful! Interrupts anyone asking questions, shouts, etc. I'm convinced he was an aggressive drunk idiot back in the day. Get another judge. This guy has got to go!

@Me Too Is A Sham

You must be male. What is clear in the hearings is that Kavanaugh likes beer, interrupts the committee and likes to raise his voice.

It is also clear Ford and Kavanaugh have very different memories.

Wasn't very impressed with some of the things I read about the Kavanaugh's testimony. His trying to turn the tables on Senator Klobuchar after she asked him about his drinking habits was a pretty stupid move. Kavanaugh is basically in a job interview and since accusations have been raised concerning Kavanaugh's behavior while drinking, of course questions must be asked about his drinking habits. It's nothing personal. It's just a subject that has to be raised. For Kavanaugh to try to turn the question around on the Senator just shows that he doesn't have a clue about what's going on here or what the respective roles of Senator Klobuchar and himself are in these hearings.

"...this guy's completely unhinged and disrespectful! Interrupts anyone asking questions, shouts, etc."

YEP!!!

If I were innocent, I'd act the same way too!!

Say hello to your new Supreme Court Justice Democrats!

Remember all those nice little laws that you had legislated through stupid, liberal judges? Say bye bye to them.

MAGA.

I think its funny that the senate hearing zero'd in on his underage drinking in HIGH SCHOOL.

Snicker...

Like nobody EVER got drunk attending a party during high school.

Snicker...

Next up: Brett Kavanaugh did a #2 in his diaper when he was 1!!!!!

So stupid.

Does anyone remember the Rolling Stone article about the so-called rape of a woman at University of Virginia at a party in a fraternity? It ended up being completely false. The woman made it up.

I am female and based upon the repeated over the top sexual assault accusations from the Democrats whenever someone who is Republican is appointed, I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that #MeToo is in 95% of the so called cases are a complete fraud.

I find it completely beyond belief that the Kavanaugh accuser somehow suddenly "remembered" this event that she says she repressed six years ago or so in a psychiatrist office while she was undergoing couple counseling. I find her testimony rehearsed and completely unbelievable.

I do not believe that Asia Argento ever was raped by Weinstein, but I do believe she is the one who had sexual relations with an underage boy. In terms of these actresses, I think they are just trying to get attention.

However, I do believe Bill Cosby was guilty of drugging and sexually assaulting multiple women. This was part of a criminal trial and there was actual due process that convicted him.

Now all it takes to destroy any male's reputation is to tweet something on Twitter or publish a rant on Medium. I think the Kavanaugh spectacle is a national disgrace and that the Democratic Party should just disband as a political organization.

Also, I believe it was completely ridiculous that Tri-Valley Haven come out with an editorial suggesting that they believe the Kavanaugh accuser based upon no facts and no witnesses.

@BobB - "This isn't a trial, it's a job interview." These are Finestein's exact words. Don't you have a mind of your own? Typical Dem talking point plant.

"Unhinged, interruptive", etc., etc.

I thought it was good strategy in using up the democratic five minute time limit.

Sham,

I very clearly remember the UVA story. Both the University and Rolling Stone got sued royally over the story. In fact, the author was fired.

It was all a lie that was pushed forward by politics and they paid a price.

I also remember the Duke Lacross team and those false allegations. Those boys made a boatload off their lawsuits.

Kavanaugh and Judge should sue everyone!

The Washington newspapers report...

"Two men have come forward to tell Senate investigators they, not Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, could have been responsible for the encounter Christine Blasey Ford describes when she says she was sexually assaulted at a high school party 36 years ago.

The Judiciary Committee Republican staff did not release any details about the men, but said each had been interviewed, and one had provided a written statement."

I am fully convinced that Kavanaugh's accuser purposefully lied. She is a disgrace.

@Sham--
Good to know you have more expertise than Tri-Valley Haven to assess whether or not a woman (or man) has experienced sexual assault/abuse. Don't forget her life has been destroyed, too, both then and now.

Woman are subject to many subtle forms of abuse, disrespect, and discrimination. For instance I had a male co-worker who asked me how my sex life was with my husband. He never asked the men at the office the same question. And there are comments like "little lady". Do we call men "little men"?

We can't honestly know what did or didn't happen to Ford and Kavanaugh in 1982. This is why an FBI investigation is necessary.

He will get confirmed and the FEMA will lose seats after this abortion.

What dissapoints me about this process is the power grab over position apppintment will drive party politics and warfare to the worst limits. We will never now the truth about these stories and the individuals involved will all be drawn through the mud regardless of guilt or innocence for pure political gain. Its not about finding the right balance/candidate for the position its just pure politics.

We seriously need to start fining politicians for acting like a-holes all the time

Maybe he'll get confirmed. We'll see. But no matter what happens there's no scenario where the Republican party ends up looking good here. This is going to hurt them in November.

Resident, I believe you are making this up.

Resident said: Woman are subject to many subtle forms of abuse, disrespect, and discrimination. For instance I had a male co-worker who asked me how my sex life was with my husband. He never asked the men at the office the same question. And there are comments like "little lady". Do we call men "little men"?"

Resident, did you report the male co-worker to HR? Probably not. Because anyone that actually had that asked of them would in fact report that to HR.

And am I take it that you went around to poll the entire office to find out whether this question was asked of the men? And were you written up by HR for this? Because if you went around asking the men this, unless you worked for Uber, this would not be tolerated in any company.

This is why the MeToo has little to no credibility. This is because women have a propensity to make up attention-getting fabrications. And they tend to call men "little men" all the time particularly when they accuse men of having "Napoleon complexes."

Lots of typical Rethug responses. One thing all rethugs have in common is that you don't believe anything unless it happens to you. I now hope that it does.

Tune in to Hannity and await further instructions

@Sham
Wow-- Good to know you're an expert on MY life. Did I report this? No. Small company without an HR department and it was over 20 years ago in the early 1990s. As typical of the time, I brushed it off. But like others, I can remember exactly where I was in the office when this offensive question was posed. I can't tell you the exact date either. It was only a simple question, but one I will never forget due to the inappropriate nature. How do I know I was the only one he asked this question? I was newly married and most of the other employees were his bosses or much, much older. Thankfully, I have never been physically sexually assaulted.

My point with is many woman just brush off inappropriate behavior especially when it happened in the 1980s or 90s.

@Well,

People were saying that it was a job interview not a trial before Feinstein said it. I do think she and Harris did a good job today, from what I heard. I wish I could have seen the whole thing.

@Sham,

Get out of 1920. Women are allowed to vote, own property, and work outside of the house. Things have changed.

@Kavanaugh defenders,

Tell us about sexual harassment and sexual assault in society today, and what you think we should be doing about it? Are you feminists? How are you working to help women from predatory men who abuse their power and privilege?

BobB:

How are you working to help men from predatory women who abuse their power and privilege?

@Michael Austin,

That rarely happens, but I don't want to minimize it. Powerful men abusing other men is more common, and powerful men abusing women is far more common.

I especially liked when asked about how the accusers note got leaked, Democrat Diane Feinstein blamed the ACCUSER!

LOL!

You cannot make this up!

"Tell us about sexual harassment and sexual assault in society today, and what you think we should be doing about it?"

A1.) Report it when it happens, then follow the law.

"Are you feminists?"

A2.) No. I'm pro man and woman American Citizens, and law and order.

"How are you working to help women from predatory men who abuse their power and privilege?"

A3.) Hasn't happened in real time. But I teach my girls and make sure they have the tools to deal with this situation.

Boy are you holier than thou with these questions.

Finally stopped laughing at DKHSK's comment above....WOW!

Since 1969, Republican presidential administrations have 121 criminal indictments and 89 convictions, while Democrats have had 3 and 1 respectively.

And this guys talking about how he likes law and order! These numbers don't even include the Trump criminal administration/organization! How many have already confessed and are guilty of crimes? Hypocrites in Pleasanton are completely over-the-top. Go hide little punks! Your lies are not welcomed here! I will expose every single one of you frauds! I promise!

I think all this talk about an "FBI Investigation" is another PR; delaying tactic. This matter [charges] concerns 2 juveniles in Montgomery County MD. It is not a federal case.. federal crime.. federal interest. Call the FBI today, anywhere in the country, and say "My child was sexually assaulted at a party" and watch them refer you to local authorities.. Police or Sheriff. She doesn't remember address.. date.. how she got there.. how she departed.. who witnessed. The people she named as attending have denied it happened. What's to investigate???

Nixon - Republican - 76 indictments - 55 convictions - 15 prison sentences
Ford - Republican - 1-1-1
Carter - Democrat - 1-0-0
Reagan - Republican - 26-16-8
Bush Sr - Republican - 1-1-1
Clinton - Democrat - 2-1-1
Bush Jr - Republican - 16-16-9
Obama - Democrat - 0-0-0
Trump - Retard - ????????

Sorry to burst your bubble P-town Rethugs but YOU are the criminal party, not the other way around.

Robert Adam,

Since the Kennedy Administration, the number of Legislative, Executive and Judicial Democrats being indicted vs Republicans is 44-42: Web Link

I didn't check on party affiliation of those not identified.

This is the first, and only time I'll respond to you, genius.

Winning.

I like judges who aren't sex offenders. Sorry. (sound familiar McCain fans?).

Dan, this isn’t a contest. 44-42-U tells me there were more than a total of 86 bad players. “Sad”

Kathleen,

I was responding to a comment directed at me. Otherwise, thanks for your comment.

I REALLY liked when the accusers lawyers told us that an offer to question her in her home was never made, yet the Chairman of the committee said that he DID, in fact, extend the invitation.

LOL!

Winning.

The democrats don't even have any policies anymore LOL. They just accuse their opponents of assault right before their big events (Trump, Moore, Kavanaugh).

No wonder the GOP controls the house, senate, and presidency. The SCOTUS will be blood red very soon.

Btw, I called it correct when I noted that his calendar showed details of all his activities in 1982.

There was no way the accuser could use dates or times because she knew he’d have her number.

This is the most persuasive evidence yet to his complete innocence.

Looks like he has it made it. 3 dens got mad walked out and won’t vote.

Yes, the full Senate vote will probably confirm him, which is what I kind of expected, but didn't want. It would have been better to find a well qualified woman instead, at least to appear to be sensitive to the plight of women in today's America.

When you sit on a complaint for 6 weeks and manipulate the situation for your best agenda this is what happens. The Democrats have only themselves to blame. Why did they hold on to it: because they knew by stalling and holding this secret they could stall this vote well past the midterms. This is all about strategy, not about the truth. This has nothing to do with Dr. Ford and her alleged victimization. They used her and it backfired. Remember, this is the New Democratic Party. It is not the Party of JFK. Heck, it isn’t even the Party of Clinton, a man flawed by all examination. They are still smarting because President Trump was elected and they can’t figure out why that happened. Look in the mirror liberals and you will find your answer.

@Jake Waters :"Why did they hold on to it: because they knew by stalling and holding this secret they could stall this vote well past the midterms. "

Didn't Republicans stall by not even considering the Supreme Court nominee proposed by the last President even though there was about a year still left in his term? How is that not a case of "manipulate the situation for your best (political) agenda"?

Yes, there is tribalism and partisan politics at play on both sides.

BobB,

I believe the next Supreme Court justice after Kavanaugh will be either Judge Joan Laurson or Judge Amy Barrett. Both very good judges and well qualified.

Doug,

“Didn't Republicans stall by not even considering the Supreme Court nominee proposed by the last President even though there was about a year still left in his term?“

No. They held up the Democrats request, again from good ole Joe Biden, to not consider high level appointment within an election.

I’ve said it time and time again: you will not like having to live by your own rules, which is exactly happening to you genius Democrats now.

Fun, isn’t it?

Want a return to civility?

No more lying for politics?

No more illegal investigations into conservative groups.

No more withholding evidence that might affect a trial so you can make a political point.

No more pitting race against race or man against woman.

Promote America, not globalists.

Until then, get ready to lose.

@ DKHSK You seem just as "unhinged" as Kavanaugh.

American,

Yep. I admitted it upthread did I not?

I have no patience for left wing Democrat lies and squishy RINO surrender anymore.

Don’t like it? Don’t read and respond. And if you do respond in the negative, such as you have, DONT expect civility.

Dan

No proof. I don't stand with an accuser simply because they accuse. As a woman I am very sensitive to women's issues and this particular topic.
I will not accuse without proof and there are way too many holes in her story.
Perhaps something happened to her however it was not by Judge Kavanaugh-
*I am not a Republican- but I stand in support of our judicial process innocent until proven guilty.

None of her story makes any sense. She has no idea where the house was in what she claims was maybe in Bethesda MD. She has no idea how she got there and how she got home. No one has stepped forward saying they drove her there and drove her home. Wouldn't you think at this point someone would have come out of the woodwork saying they drove her home? Even if she had hitchhiked home, don't you think that someone would have come forward saying they drove her home?

She said that she was upstairs because she had to go upstairs to use the bathroom at the house. Bathrooms are on the first floor in Bethesda MD houses and townhouses. Why would she have to go upstairs? Bathrooms are also in many basements particularly in those with walk out basements. Back in the 80's, many people on the East Coast had rec rooms in the basement.

If this had actually happened, my opinion is that she would have gone to the Montgomery County Police or she would have remembered the date or the house or at least the street. Unfortunately, it sounds like a fabrication just like the supposed rape in the UVA fraternity that never happened.

"Bathrooms are on the first floor in Bethesda MD houses and townhouses. Why would she have to go upstairs?"

** eyes rolling **

No.

Good job Jeff Flake for getting the delay for the FBI background check. Maybe this will help in the long run, whatever is decided.

All I know is that if someone was blaring music at a party in the quiet upscale suburbs of Bethesda or Potomac, the neighbors would have summoned law enforcement for a noise complaint in about 5 minutes including in 1982.

That is why it does not make sense when the accuser says they turned up the music loudly in the upstairs bedroom. Then she claimed all she heard was laughing. If the music was so loud, how could she hear the laughter?

And why has she not called her boyfriend, the person named Squi, to testify? And where are statements from Squi supporting her account? There are nowhere to be found.

If it loud party happens in College Park or the shore (Ocean City, Rehoboth, Dewey), perhaps the police would not be called. But in Bethesda and the surrounding area, someone will surely call law enforcement and complain about the noise.

Therefore I don't believe this happened. Nothing adds up. Also the only place where there are no bathrooms on the ground floor are near the beaches in Maryland.

Also the FBI has no jurisdiction when there is no Federal crime. She isn't claiming an adult transported her across State lines for sexual purposes, is she? And she isn't claiming she was kidnapped. Unless it involves the Mann Act or some other Federal crime, the FBI has no jurisdiction.

I'll bet she'll suddenly say it happened at a beach. Or in Rockville. Or maybe PG County? Or Towson. Or Gaithersburg. Or some other state.

This is absurd.

I believe Ford said she heard the two boys in the room laughing; completely plausible. The people you want to come forward publicly likely won’t because of comments like yours. Better to give statements to the FBI.

This is a lifetime appointment. The FBI has investigated Kavanaugh before; they just need to dig deeper.

As to Kavanaugh’s bombastic testimony, that isn’t how the innocent behave. The tantrum shows a weakness, not strength. Especially for a man who is well educated and a trained judge. He looked more like the 15 year old he might have been according to others.

Ford was credible; its possible Kavanaugh is not that boy. But she has nothing to gain, and he has much to lose. Worth trying to figure it out. People believe this is about the mid-terms. I believe most voters are not on the fence. Either way, there is time to find justice for both people involved.

Very disappointed in Ann King's over-reaching opinion in today's Weekly. Uncorroborated accusations from FOUR decades ago with NO willing witnesses, NO evidence, can't remember dates or exact locations. Yet the accusation is enough to destroy a MANs life work. #MeToo as a political weapon that now will also compromise traumatized women trying to honestly come forward with their personal need for true help. Sickening.

Dr. Ford was compelling and honest, I believe she was traumatized in her teens, but I can't give Dr. Ford benefit of the doubt in accusing Kavanaugh four decades later because of the orchestrated timing of her accusation and how Sen Fienstein and other Democrats USED Dr. Ford as a political pawn.

I will no longer support with donations to Tri-Valley Haven as long as Ann King remains as Executive Director. I will find another Bay Area service to support. Why did you have to politicize a great community service like the Haven, Ann? Like Dr. Ford herself, you will soon learn you've done a great dis-service to actual Tri-Valley women in factual, honest need.

With the Holton-Arms girls school culture of continuous binge drinking and alcohol-fueled promiscuity, it is no wonder Blasey has no clear memories. The yearbooks read like a playbook from Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

What is telling is that none of Blasey's brothers or parents supported her by being at the hearing even though most of them already they live in the DC area. Also she had to hire a team of lawyers (pro bono probably connected to the Democratic Party I have read...is that correct) even though her immediate family includes attorneys?

Blasey could probably next say she was pinned down at some fraternity and it happened at University of North Carolina. Or Duke. Of NC State.

I felt that it was completely disrespectful for Kamala Harris to organize a walk out today. Now that was tantrum-like behavior.

Finally coming together! A one week delay and new FBI investigation into recent allegations !

On our way to legalizing rape. USA! USA! USA!

We all must honestly ask IF a forty year old accusation on it's own is enough to even warrant an FBI investigation. Does this meet a threshold? No evidence or witnesses, I honestly don't think it does. There is no 'justice' can be produced from this process now.

Opinion, agree about Kamala Harris. We don’t know what will or won’t be found, but it’s worth clearing doubt if possible. I don’t want another Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas question mark. Again, if the mid-terms are what this is about, there is time to clear Kavanaugh or not.

Just like this Holton-Arms trustee was initially arrested in Bethesda for a teen drinking party Web Link , if there had been a loud party in the Bethesda area, Chevy Chase area, or Potomac area, the police would have been summoned. It is almost impossible to have any noise or music playing in these suburbs without attracting law enforcement.

Since Blasey can remember no memory of going to or coming home from the so-called party and can find no one who remembers driving her to some location or driving her home from that location, I can only conclude that the party, if it really occurred at all, actually happened in her own family's residence in Potomac. Perhaps she invited people to her house without her parents' knowledge.

Her story seems implausible to me because she has no date or day that it happened, she has no memory of escaping a house the somehow attempting to get home from the mystery house to her house in Potomac. If she had walked from the mystery house to Potomac, wouldn't she have had a memory of that? Nothing adds up.

Again, let the expert investigators noodle this out. If it falls apart, if the memory falls somewhere else, sobeit. But Kavanaugh was a partying man and not everything he says was credible. “I was a virgin.” Not an excuse for whether you may have tried not to be one.

@Kathleen : ““I was a virgin.” Not an excuse for whether you may have tried not to be one.”

Pretty surprising that that’s the level of logical rigor displayed by someone who is supposed to be Supreme Court Justice caliber. Can we assume that he would accept an “It couldn’t have been me, judge! I’m a virgin!” excuse from a defendant accused of sexual assault in one of his own court cases? If so, then it seems that he isn’t a very good judge.

Christine Blasey was quoted as far back as 4/2017 to be part of a well organized anti-Trump organization slong with Pleasanton protesters back in April 2017 in the San Jose Mercury News. Here it is- Web Link

She is quoted in the article above and it includes statements about her wearing "pussy hats" knitted by a Pleasanton resident, her friend Eilene Cross, and worn by Blasey in a protest march against Trump.

When Kavanaugh was appointed as an appeals court judge (that is also confirmed by the Senate), if her allegations had any truth to them, why did she not speak up then during that confirmation process when George Bush nominated him in 2003. Where was Christine Blasey then? Where was she back 15 years ago?

It is only after she has become an anti-Trump activist that out of the blue she comes forward. And no one she mentions in the letter to Feinstein corroborates anything she says.

It is very sad that both Pleasanton and Palo Alto residents would go to such an extreme to attempt to destroy a person's reputation based on political circus sideshow. But we have seen the same thing happen in Pleasanton twice in recent events so it comes as no surprise.

@Sham

It looks like Donald Trump disagrees with you:

Donald Trump: Christine Ford “"was a very credible witness".

Sfgate: Web Link
- - -

Dr. Ford is now at least $500K richer for her testimony with GoFundMe funds. This will motivate bottom feeders like the porn star lawyer avanetti to try to bring other woman into it to extend his 15 minutes and to cash in on additional crowd funding initiatives.

I happen to be a single Hispanic mom with two daughters. I was moved by his sincere and raw testimony and think someone like that would be perfect on the bench as his life seems much like many others where he has a young family, he coached girls’ sports and volunteers at a soup kitchen. This is the type of person that I’d feel comfortable making decisions that could impact our lives.

I do believe Dr. Ford may have experienced an attempted sexual assault, but not by this judge. Unfortunately the dems used her as a pawn and Feinstein leaked the letter right before the judge was to be confirmed and had the nerve to blame the leak on Dr. King herself. Oh well, I bet the $500K + she’s receiving will make things all better.

Anyway, he’s the right one and I predict he’ll be seated on the bench.

Blasey claimed that in May 2012 after an extensive remodel, she wanted to have double front doors installed and revealed in couples therapy that this is when she did the big reveal about the supposed Kavanaugh "sexual assault" (her term).

You would think with the fancy lawyers hired by the Dems, they would check the city records in Palo Alto to see if there was an extensive remodel on file in 2012. There isn't. They did an extensive remodel in 2007, five years earlier.

There were no remodel activities in 2012. In some years there were minor items (car charger, solar panels, etc.), but nothing in 2012.

Busted again. It must be hard to keep track of all the lies.

@Opinion

Think that you’re a bit confused. Christine Ford has said that as a result of the incident with Kavanaugh that she feels trapped without an exit route. That means installing not a new front door (since there already was a front door) but installing a new bedroom exit door which didn’t previously exist. She and her husband did indeed do that in 2008:

“Building permit shows Christine Blasey Ford really did put a backdoor on her bedroom”
Palo Alto Daily : Web Link

Looks like you’re the one who is busted, Mr. “”It’s-Impossible-to-Have-a-Party-in-Bethesda” guy.

Liz Swisher, former Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, gives her views on Kavanaugh and his testimony :Web Link

- - -

We are no longer a "Nation under God" ....as we recited for so many years or what we proudly cared for about our country, not only the freedom but the countess privileges we all take for granted.

This has turned into a dog eat dog world. It's like watching a real live cock fight to see how much blood we can get out of a person, or how much damage we can create against this person and not caring if either person is left with any respect and dignity. Is this the kind of world we want for our children to live in or for those that follow us after we are gone?

We weren't brought up to live as animals..at least we weren't! What a sad world we have become! We should hang our heads in shame! We have truly lost our way.

Our Nation is no longer respected, we are being laughed by the entire world. How very sad for us all. Where did we go wrong ?

I look forward to the FBI report.

Kavanaugh will be seated before the midterms.

Definition of Credible: offering reasonable grounds for being believed.

Definition of Truthful: telling or disposed to tell the truth.


The accused was truthful and the accuser was credible, as MANY of you have pointed out.

I'll take truthful over credible every time.

@DKHSK

Who said Kavanaugh was “truthful”? Certainly not this Yale classmate of Kavanaugh:

Liz Swisher, former Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, gives her views on Kavanaugh: Web Link

- - -

He will be seated soon and then we just need to pray that Ginsberg dies in the next 6 years.

"Who said Kavanaugh was “truthful”?"

65 women (mostly professional lawyers) gave a letter asserting to his truthfulness, honesty, and decency.

Do you doubt their credibility or honesty?

You don't hate women, do you?

See how this works?

When Ginsberg passes, Trump will nominate a woman to fill the seat.

Then watch the hypocrisy when Democrats attack her because she's a woman.

It will be the spectacle to end all spectacles.

You heard it here first.

Wow...one whole classmate out of thousands that he interfaced with...

Yep, she's credible.

@DKHSK : “65 women (mostly professional lawyers) gave a letter asserting to his truthfulness, honesty, and decency. Do you doubt their credibility or honesty?”

Say, Dan. Would this be one of those women who signed that letter in support of Kavanaugh’s “honesty and decency”? LOL!

“When Renate Schroeder Dolphin signed a group letter to the Senate judiciary committee claiming that Brett Kavanaugh treated women with respect, she didn’t realize that the boy she had known in high school had publicly slut-shamed her for the amusement of his fellow football players.”
Guardian: Web Link
- - -

No...I was referring to the 65 women who signed the letter.

I can see you don't want to answer my questions so I'll just move along.

Thanks for playing.

If that had been a custody hearing she would have got the kids.

I'm stunned in reading comments above from people weighing the guilt significance to installing the extra door in Dr. Ford's bedroom. Proof many people are off the rails blind from their frothing hate of all things Trump. Let's get back to weighing the raw evidence, people. Lets at least stand on our fundamental platform of 'innocent until proven guilty'. The burden is on Dr. Ford.


Dr. Ford can offer America NO corroboration and ZERO supporting evidence. So far all critical information about the accusations are exclusively inside her head. Courts of law are likely amazed the frailty of these accusations now warrants an FBI investigation.


Truly, if Dr. Ford wanted to begin overcoming personal demons regarding her 36 year old trauma, wouldn't she logically start by filing charges with the Montgomery County (MD) Sheriffs office? Instead she writes a 'tell-all' letter to her local congresswomen? Sorry I'm a thinking man, but all this just doesn't yet pass the smell test. This nets out to political search & destroy.


Like so many other American's this week, Ann King reaches for the emotional tug response within her opinion piece - but noticeably steers away from balanced logic.

You are missing the point. Ford is a very well educated, smart woman who knows well that no court will convict the guy on the recollections of her bad experience. She isn't interested in sending the guy to jail. She is putting herself on a very difficult position by telling her story, subjecting herself, her family, and even her parents to death threats. She had to go into hiding while judge K is passing out cookies in his front yard. That's what right wingers do. They have no problem making death threats. Sandy Hook kid's parents have had to move 7 times in 9 years because of death threats. The right wingers post addresses of people online and others go by and harass them constantly. How would you like it if I did that to you every time you left your house to go to the store?

All Ford and the other accusers are saying is "surely we can do better than this guy!" And I believe that we can. The president can nominate ANYONE to the supreme court. ANYONE! Doesn't have to be a judge or anything. I believe that we have better janitors and garbage men in this great country, with better morals than this frat boy.

Blasey did not seem well educated to me. She talked in a breathy little girl voice and seemed to act child-like rather than a mature, educated women. I don't know if she was coached to talk in this baby voice or whether that is her natural voice.

In addition, she was caught in a major lie. Web Link

The Palo Alto remodeling permits where she stated she wanted a second front door to her house that caused the culminating revelation to her husband in May 2012 were actually approved in 2007 by Palo Alto. The work was completed in 2008. You can see them all on the City of Palo Alto website.

If you look at the questioning of Feinstein in the hearing, it is clearly about a second front door, not a second bedroom door. In addition, she later reveals she is renting yes RENTING out a portion of her home in some sort of BNB rental situation. She contradicts herself later in the hearing and reveals she is renting out her home to Google interns and the Google interns access their rental space via the second front door.

So here you have someone who claims they have been traumatized for life by the so-call house party incident, but who then rents out a portion of her home to absolute strangers?

I don't know if she also rents out her Santa Cruz house to strangers as well.

Considering her husband set up a Go Fund Me page that is now over a half million, I'd say they are in this for the money.

Here is the original video of the major lie she appeared to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee. The proof that the timing she told the Committee is all on the City of Palo Alto building permit section of their website:

Web Link

She isn't a "truth teller" at all based on this. Instead she is probably in this for the money. I'll bet next we hear she has a book deal.

Disgusting.

After a VERY reasoned, passionate and accurate comment from Del Prado we get this:

"You are missing the point. Ford is a very well educated, smart woman who knows well that no court will convict the guy on the recollections of her bad experience."

So let's rip this apart.

Instead of rule of law and presumption of innocence, this genius clearly states here that if one is a "well educated, smart" person, one only needs to make an accusation to be able to presume someone guilty.

I applaud you for telling us how you really feel.

Let's all hope that you never get accused of a crime (I don't, personally).

Dan

Del Prado,

Ugh...her voice and mannerisms were so fake.

FBI will find nothing, but that won't stop Flake from voting no.

Dan

So much partisan posturing here. In my humble opinion, everyone would be better off, including Kavanaugh, if we hit the reset button, let Trump nominate a well qualified woman, and we move on. Kavanaugh keeps his job, pension, etc. Conservatives get a textualist judge on the court.

"All Ford and the other accusers are saying is 'surely we can do better than this guy!'"


This is completely absurd - and revealing. So many on the left apparently think nothing of destroying a very talented American man's life and family simply for ideological comfort. That is completely unacceptable. Circumvent an established nomination process, withhold evidence during scheduled hearings and get the secret Ace up your sleeve lawyered up until DiFi can spring the trap. And they're caught red-handed doing this!


Let me remind all you crooked 'by any means necessary' people that we are first and foremost a Nation of Laws each protected by the US Constitution. You hold ZERO common sense bedrock in your arguments here. If Dr. Ford fails in finding no further evidence, she should be subject to 5 years in jail for Federal perjury. There must be consequences and thus far she looks over-exposed in her claims.

Here's what I heard:

Judge K: "Senators we are gathered beer...I mean here today because I beer....I mean hear of some woman accuser. I keg of you...I mean beg of you to ignore the beer stains on my past and proceed with the beering without delay. My calendars clearly show that I wasn't even beer (near) the house in question that week."

But you are the "blame the victim" party, big surprise.

@Delprado Nester :”If Dr. Ford fails in finding no further evidence, she should be subject to 5 years in jail for Federal perjury.”

Yeah, right. That will happen. The comments here are getting loonier and loonier.

Blasey perjured herself in saying she was a psychologist. She is not. She does not have a license to practice psychology in the State of California.

Did she dupe Stanford as well? Her old profile from the Stanford website lists her as a Research Psychologist. See Web Link">Web Link

But within the last few days, apparently Stanford has looked into her background and removed that description from the website.

Now she is merely an "Affiliate." Here is their updated current website with her ob title of Research Psychologist removed and replaced by Affiliate Web Link

Hopefully the State of California will also prosecute for posing as a licensed psychologist when she is not.

You ARE missing the point. This is a job interview. If you were interviewing people and someone said one of your candidates has a shady past wouldn't you move on to the next candidate?

"Yeah, right. That will happen. The comments here are getting loonier and loonier."

If guided by the rule of law and the US Constitution, this topic will start making more sense to you. Wishing for 'your guy or gal' on the Supreme Court ISN'T how our system works or ever worked. There are consequences for losing elections.

I think there are two points that fall under "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Absence of evidence: Evidence of absence
Dr. Ford cannot provide a date or address: that doesn't prove the assault didn't happen as she claims.
Kavanaugh, J.D., no parties on his calendar: that doesn't prove he didn't attend as he claims.

Maybe they are both telling the truth or they are both lying or each holds a piece of the truth or they are both bad people and any other combination. At the moment, it would seem only a few people know the truth . . . and it isn't anybody here.

What is very likely is that the event is much more likely to be engraved in the victim's memory and can be totally meaningless and forgettable by the DRUNK offender.

This isn't a 'job interview.' In fact it is a national disgrace brought to you by the Democratic Party. This is as bad as the worst type of politics that usually are at a local level like in Pleasanton, but this time it is on a national level.

No wonder public school teachers/college professors have such a bad reputation. They are at the level of used car salesmen and lawyers. And who in their right mind would enroll in Stanford now given it appears they don't check the backgrounds of the people they hire?

This is a case of a woman who has under oath told a Senate Committee she was sexually assaulted by a person while with her best friend Leland Keyser was downstairs, who has now twice stated via a letter from an attorney that she never attended the party Blasey describes.

Also under oath she states she is a psychologist when in fact she doesn't have a license to practice psychology in California.

Also she states she put a second front door on her house because of "trauma" from the supposed sexual assault when in reality it was to modify her house to be a duplex so she can lease short term to Google interns to make money on the side (probably in conflict with Palo Alto's zoning regulations against short term leases).

Also she is financially gaining over a half million from GoFundMe at the same time while a whole set of past acquaintances are having to shell out money for attorneys to refute her claims.

Correction:

forgettable TO the drunk offender

oh, if only you spent half of the time you are spending blaming this woman into looking at what your boy's been up to...

"Dr. Ford cannot provide a date or address that doesn't prove the assault didn't happen as she claims.
Kavanaugh, J.D., no parties on his calendar that doesn't prove he didn't attend as he claims."

Kathleen,

You DO see that you are putting the presumption of guilt on the accused, right?

I'll help you:

"...that doesn't prove he didn't attend as he claims."

Exactly why does he have to provide evidence in his case? Even if he does, as he has now, you STILL say he hasn't proved his innocence.

Are you doing this on purpose, or do you not read what you're typing? I really would like to know.

Dan

Dan, I was using specific claims. Neither Ford nor Kavanaugh has provided much to go on. I don’t know the truth. You don’t either. I hope the FBI finds someone(s) to corroborate one side; the other; both.

1. You people are talking past each other at this point. It is just silly. One side totally discredits Dr. Ford and the other takes her word as gospel and wouldn't want Kavanaugh even if Ford's story was totally false.

2. Stop talking about presumption of innocence. For the umpteenth time, this isn't a trial. This is a lot more like a background check that a government agent or serviceman would get in order to be granted access to classified material. Presumption of innocence is never operative in a security clearance check, and it shouldn't be here. Often just the appearance of unseemly or questionable behavior can torpedo a background check. In the case of this confirmation hearing, it goes further than that. It is also a statement. It is a statement to the American people that we will or won't grant a person a lifetime appointment on the most powerful court in the world who may have sexually assaulted a woman, as is claimed. Even if you think the chances are only 20% that Kavanaugh really did this, I would say that is enough to disqualify him.

Hit reset. Pick a qualified conservative woman to the court, and send the right message.

BobB,

The replacement for Ginsberg will be Judge Barrett. She is very conservative.

Actually, Blasey has given a lot to go on. Her words in the Senate hearing are so much like word for word descriptions in the now discredited article from Rolling Stone A Rape on Campus about a fake rape that did not happen at UVA that you would have to wonder whether she used it as an entire model to base her accusation. However she omits the location and says she has no memory of how she got there and how she left. Some similarities:

UVA: met Drew while lifeguarding at the pool at UVA
Blasey: met boys while diving at the pool at the country club

UVA: Went upstairs because Drew said it was quieter up there
Blasey: Went upstairs to use the bathroom

UVA:"Jackie began to scream...When yet another hand clamped over her mouth...."
Blasey: Hand clamped over mouth

UVA: "The men surrounding her began to laugh."
Blasey: Testimony regarding laughter.

UVA: "She remembers the men’s heft..."
Blasey: She remembers the crushing weight...

UVA: "hurrying down a side staircase...Disoriented, Jackie burst out a side door, realized she was lost, and dialed a friend, screaming..."
Blasey: She says she runs down the front staircase, out the front door and then has no memory. Her mind goes blank.

Steve Hilton: Kavanaugh hearing shows divisive Democrats must be defeated before they destroy America

Web Link

Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at Web Link

"R" next to your name stands for Rapist

Forbes: on what not to do in an interview

Web Link

Think outside the talking points. Don't be a robot.

"Forbes: on what not to do in an interview"

Exactly. Just based on the unprofessional behavior and temperament that Kavanaugh displayed during the hearings, I think that he should be disqualified from further consideration for a job as Supreme Court Justice. As far as I'm concerned, for the purpose of judging his fitness for the Supreme Court it doesn't even matter anymore if he's innocent or guilty of the accusations raised against him because he's revealed that he doesn't have the judgement or temperament to be a Supreme Court Justice.

@KR,

Good article. Another reason to take a pass on this nominee.

We all have opinions!

I want to chime in here:
Kavanaugh completed his job interview during the course of his first appearance before the senate committee.

His second appearance before the senate committee was his response, in defense against his accuser.

It was standard lawyer rhetoric!

You sheeple need to start thinking about RBG taking a dirt nap and how she will be replaced. na8

Kathleen,

"I hope the FBI finds someone(s) to corroborate one side; the other; both."

They won't be able to corroborate "both", since he's been accused of sexual abuse based on her accusation only at this point.

He has his calendar, which is...uh...kinda corroborating. She has...nothing.

So I guess HIS corroborating evidence is meaningless. Meanwhile, we're still being asked to believe HER in the absence of any evidence.

Really?

Still not getting it, eh?

"Often just the appearance of unseemly or questionable behavior can torpedo a background check."

Where is the appearance of unseemly and questionable behavior?

Be specific.

And you get no points for pointing out the behavior of a teenager, unless you're willing to state, laughably, that teenagers are cut from the cloth and God and act accordingly.

If you do, you will be mocked from here to the moon.

"Stop talking about presumption of innocence."

No.

You're not the arbiter of defining terms.

Go back to defending Kamala Harris, "republican".

Dan

Sham,

I applaud your knowledge of the UVA tragedy. Great comparison.

Makes it look like this whole episode is political op, no?

Parallels to the Russian debacle and Mueller right...wonder what happened to that?

Calling Doug...

"Think outside the talking points."

"Think outside the evidence"

Rewritten to express the democrats talking point.

:)

@DKHSK,

Not a Republican, I am an independent, but I will also praise some of Ted Cruz had to say about tribalism and the way people approach these hearings. Kamala Harris and Ted Cruz were both pretty good. I just think Cruz was coming to the wrong conclusion.

I like how the RINO's and the democrats are now pivoting towards Kavanaughs "temperament".

They (the RINO's) STILL haven't embraced the fact that the Republicans are slowly starting to implement the Democrat strategy of fighting back.

Here's something you can do: join up with Bill Kristol and his Law and Order Party and be permanently placed in the dustbin of history.

You've involved us in too many wars and you capitulated one too many times in the name of a "global community" while neglecting American citizens.

WE DON'T NEED YOU.



No longer a big tent for you sq

I'll bet good money that Blasey and the Democratic political operatives used Mark Judge's book + the UVA Rolling Stone article to come up with this. I did listen to the questioning and her responses and Blasey kept looking down at a piece of paper when they kept asking about what she specifically remembered. Why did she have to look at a piece of paper?

Blasey could not remember who paid for her polygraph a few weeks ago, but for some reason remembers Mark Judge worked at the Potomac Village Safeway back in the early 1980s? If she has to follow a script and look at pieces of paper, this indicates to me that the event she describes did not occur.

My opinion involving the "Mark Judge sighting" at the Safeway was one that she got that directly from his book where he references working at a grocery store. In her testimony, she said she in a friendly manner greeted him a few weeks later at Safeway after the alleged assault because they were always "friendly." Who would greet someone who actually participated in a sexual assault in a friendly manner?

Another thing is that in her testimony she says she looked in Mark Judge's eyes to see if he would stop the so-called "attack" and the there is a similar couple of sentences where in the Rolling Stone article where Jackie states she looks at the person in her Anthropology class the same way hoping he too will stop the so-called "attack" at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity near the UVA campus.

I find it hard believe that somehow Blasey remembers Mark Judge worked at the Potomac Village Safeway (he references working in a grocery store in his book), but could not remember basic details of the location, including the city or the street of the so-called attack.

By Blasey being vague and not stating even an approximate date and location, I believe that is on purpose as well. Hopefully the FBI will interrogate her without her notes being allowed and without her Democratic operative team allowed to be present. I will bet she will refuse to take another law enforcement - administered polygraph as well.

My favorite thing is how you brave keyboard warriors use your names and neighborhoods in the headings. Rethug punk trolls. Worthless cowards!

LOL!

"keyboard warriors"

The irony is thick.

The great thing is that the Senate has asked the FBI to investigate and prosecute all the false allegations about Kavanaugh including the Rhode Island operative that sent a letter claiming Kavanaugh assaulted someone on a boat in August 1985.

Here is the letter from the Senate:
Web Link

It will be interesting for the FBI to tie the activities of those making the false allegations together. I do hope that they all get imprisoned for making claims that they know are patently false.

Sham,

Outstanding research.

Note how not one "keyboard warrior", squishy RINO and Democrat will engage with you regarding the facts?

Thanks for your diligence. I mean it.

Dan

You're cherry picking the message punk!

Robert,

Please attempt to express yourself without name calling People might take you more seriously.

I won't be taking any advice from Nazis like you today Pete.

Well said good points, Sham & DKHS. the illogic of this event will eventually seep through the quick spark of misplaced emotion we saw Thursday. I'd like to think Ann King herself would come in and take opportunity to absorb your comments - the broader perspective of law & order, innocent until proven guilty over 'Believe this woman because I said so' lynch mob approach. This is a learning opportunity for Ms. King and others.


"7 full FBI investigations on Kavanaugh over 23 years and they missed the Junior/Senior serial rapist. Unbelievable." - Lindesy Graham

"Nazi"

Lol!

So typical of a fascist...!

Ha!

Hey Gina,

Isn't this when you close the thread?

Just kidding...

Where's Tom? Nevada?

Del Prado,

Call me Dan.

I've been here for years debating these yahoo's.

Pleasure to meet you.

Dan

Same for you, "Sham".

Dan

BTW, notice how Ann King WILL NOT come in and comment?

Telling isn't it?

RINO's and Democrats will never debate the topics based on logic, only emotion and "politics".

Dan

No doubt we'll dance again someday Dan. I don't expect to change your mind about anything and you can be sure you won't change mine. But, it keeps me sharp, where I want to be.

....a brief history story....My grandfather in my father's side was killed in what is now Slovakia in March 1945 pushing the Nazis back to Germany. He was 29. My father was 10 months old at the time. I've studied world history and human behavior all my life and I've only recently started calling people Nazis since being a tiki torch proud racist has come out into the open. I know you think your behavior is normal but it isn't. You've been steered to the extreme right slowly over time by a group with a very dark agenda and deep pockets.

Do yourself a favor and read or watch documentaries about Germany between the two world wars. Then see if you can spot similarities between your own beliefs and those of the fascists.

RA,

Thanks for the history and agreement. We have been saying for the longest time that today’s violent and intolerant Democrats are more like nazis than a political party. I hope it ends the same way with their demise.

Cute. I am talking about the Rethuglicals. But you knew that. Go back to making love to yourself.

Oh...good...a student of world history calling me a Nazi and racist. (Yawns)

Got anything else?

“'He wrote me beautiful letters and we fell in love': Donald Trump on Kim Jong-un”
The Guardian: Web Link

Cuckoo, Cuckoo, Cuckoo, Cuckoo, Cuckoo, Cuckoo,......

I honestly can’t wait to see what happens when Trump appoints a woman to take the bench next.

The hypocracy of the left and RINOS will be epic.

Doug,

Lol!

Living rent free in that little noggin of yours.

He’s the GOAT.

You have to admit the guy is quite the character and is an expert at trolling the media and the left.

You’re the proof.

“'SNL' has Matt Damon play an angry Brett Kavanaugh”
CNN: Web Link

Funny!

Again, stop talking about presumption of innocence. That doesn't apply here any more than it would apply in a security clearance investigation.


Even if you think there is only a small chance or probability that Kavanaugh assaulted Dr. Ford, that is a good enough reason to reject him. Send the right message and replace him with a woman.

BobB - Really? Can you tell us exactly why the 'presumption of innocence' does not apply to Ford's accusations?

She must be believed.. 'just because'? Are you sure that's how it works in America?

@DelPrado Nester

"Presumption of innocence" does not apply to making hiring decisions. If you were a hiring manager, would you hire someone who has been accused of sexual assault by three different women, or would you pass and go on to the next applicant?

A very topical post by one of Pleasanton Weekly’s own bloggers:

“Dating (or Hanging Out) While Sober: How to Pass Up Booze Without Passing on Love”
By Chandrama Anderson, Pleasanton Weekly Web Link
- - -

Gentlemen . . . (assumed) great editorial in the Mercury News today. Web Link

I’m asking Gina to consider shutting this “conversation” down. It’s devisive, corrosive, and no one here knows the truth. Kavanaugh may get appointed, and we may still never have all the answers. Have a weekend gents (?), what’s left of it.

Like most dems or nazi’s Kathleen wants to shutdown conversation which disagrees with her beliefs. Free speech huh Kathleen? Glad I voted against you. Regarding Ford. She was a politician pawn pure and simple.

Incorrect Doug. Are you an American citizen? Read the US Constitution 14th amendment; in fact read it all! Tens of thousands died to give you those rights. The context you're trying to apply to a 'job interview' in the Ford/Kavanaugh situation is incorrect. Meditate on Equal Protection Under The Law. Put country ahead of your narrow vision of 'politics'. Thanks.

Hi Kathleen - Once again the Merky's editorial leans too much on EMOTION but not facts and law. Blasey-Ford is EQUAL under the law, not SPECIAL under the law. "But she was so believable and brave.." It's nonsense and actually there were many holes in her testimony, speaking objectively. These inconsistencies should be covered as part of the investigation.

@Nestor,

Presumption of innocence would apply if he were being tried for a crime. Presumption of innocence would not apply if the CIA was doing a background check for potential employment. Nothing unconstitutional about it.

Wow, and now it's clear that Kavanaugh made blatantly false statements under oath. He claimed his high school drinking in Maryland was legal but by the time he turned 18, the legal age had been raised to 21 and he wouldn't have been covered by the grandfather clause.

What are my beliefs Pete? And, are you trying to hurt my feelings—dem, nazi, didn’t vote for me? Boo and hoo.

DP N, I hope all the inconsistencies on both sides are investigated.

Calling for the shutdown of the conversation, how "progressive."

A good way to end the name calling. A civil discussion would be preferable, but seems impossible for many.

I did vote for you, but not because you were a "dem" or a "nazi". ;)

After spending 5 hours looking online, I just switched my voter registration from Democrat to Republican this morning.

I do not believe Ford's account, and disgusted with Ford's contention that Ford is accusing Kavanaugh of attempted murder (he could have killed me!) and some type of sexual assault.

I lived in Montgomery County previously and for her to walk from Chevy Chase/Bethesda to Potomac she would have had to either 1) cross the Beltway I-495 (in that case more than likely getting run over or 2) walk on a major thoroughfare such as River Road which did not have sidewalks in many parts (in that case more than likely getting run over). If she did walk, it would take literally hours even if she teleported herself with some sort of magic transporter beam over the Beltway. And since she can't remember who drove her home, this exercise in melodrama seems to be some sort of delusional fantasy.

Binge drinking among young women in single sex female private schools in Maryland, many which are glorified finishing schools, was and is common. For her to state that remodeling permits pulled from Palo Alto in 2007 and 2008 equate to a 05-2012 couples therapy session about double front doors and Kavanaugh are absurd.

Also absurd is if she really feared for her life, wouldn't she have gone out the window of the bathroom after she locked the bathroom door? Yes, of course she would have. And then she would have gone down the street a few doors, knocked on the doors, and told the neighbors that she was nearly killed a few doors down.

What a disappointment that the Democrats would come up with this.

What’s this? Kathleen wants to stifle the conversation?

You never cease to amaze me, and not in a good way.

No, Dan, not the conversation—just the name calling, the disrespect for other viewpoints, the inability to be civil. We don’t have to agree; we also don’t need to be snarky.

So no name calling AND snarkiness?

Geez...you must be a joy at parties.

Web Link

From Politico.

Senate will now investigate Diane Fienstein for leaking.

Good. I’m voting for her competitor in hopes she goes. Worthless.

Ps Kathleen,

Lest you think I was being snarky, I wasn’t. I really mean it.

NOW Gina can close the thread :)

I am actually quite fun at parties, but just considerate enough not to suggest you wouldn’t be.

I think what is bothering a lot of people beyond the multiple "allegations" which may or may not ever be proven one way or the other, is the fact that this is a person who wants a lifetime position to the highest court in the land, and the three times that we have seen him on TV, we have seen three different people - so who is BK really?

In his original nomination hearings he seemed very calculating and vague on many questions that could have simple direct answers, but that's not the type of answers "judge" gave - frustrating many of the senators. Watching this I was already thinking already this guy seems shady... and I did not know anything about him.
Then news report follow ups show in half a dozen specific areas that he was questioned, he just plain lied.

Take two: Fox news interview he paints the picture of him self as quiet catholic school boy, only interested in sports, church and service projects.

The follow up in the news has people who knew in him high school and college coming out saying this such a lie, he was a huge partier, sloppy and angry drunk. So why did he lie about this? Why attempt to fool the nation on national television, what else is he hiding? Is the virgin angle through college and many years beyond some other attempt at misdirection and deceit? Did he not think the truth would come out. I felt like I was watching Bill Clinton, who also went on national television and lied to us all, looking right into the camera! So at this point I am not getting a great feeling about this guy who wants to be on the Supreme Court.

Web Link

The Sequel: The word is out now, so suddenly the judge now loves beer. No mention of beer on Fox news. He loves beer, belongs to the 100 Keg club, but never drank to excess ... who does he expect to believe this.

As has been mentioned before, just based on the lies and deception he has presented to this point on so many things besides the "allegations" - I pass on him for a supreme court position and move on to the next candidate, too many skeletons.

Prosecutor that questioned Blakey-Ford shreds her testimony:

Web Link

Libs and RINO's won't read this because it goes against their already preconceived notions of guilt of the Judge.

It a damning report of the accuser.

Well, it’s not a trial and the report isn’t damning. Based on what the prosecutor knows, she wouldn’t take it to trial. She does not have the information the FBI may or may not find that may or may not change her mind.

Here is the article I was referencing from the NY Times. It details all the "misleading" statements and answers to direct questions that the judge has provided going back to his nomination hearings.

It is long (which is also concerning) but does a decent job of summarizing the variety of areas where his answers do not seem to add up, seem intentionally vague or intentionally misleading... would not be my first pick.

Web Link