3. The Ford's story is fake and the Dems have nothing to do with it (except maybe happily jumping on it).

We won't get it until it is clairified. And as this is all happening in the US, it might never get clarified.

While I find this Kavanaugh guy extremly unlikeable (a completly subjective and superficial notion ) - at least he had some life when he was a teen.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, oder? See also Obama's Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland.

At that time, it was a Democratic president that had nominated a SC justice, and the Republicans were the ones playing the game. Garland was well-qualified and didn't have anything dodgy in his past like Kavanaugh allegedly does. Yet the Rs would not even give him a hearing, much less a simple up or down vote.

I don't know about you guys, but if I turned up to a job interview, claiming how much I loved beer, then started crying, I wouldn't rate my chances very high.

But you do love beer, don't you? And can you please provide your calendars for the summer of 1982? Thx

Absolutely.

Kavanaugh made a teenage refugee wait for her abortion, thus allowing the baby to grow and making it more difficult to go through the procedure.

It serves him right that he needs to wait. I preferable would like him to wait forever for the Supreme Justice bench.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens...wyer-1.4814456

..... and not having been born by 1982 we will not accept for an excuse!

Sure, no problem providing my calendar, you will just have to wait until the ink dries

i'd rate them at 0 the moment I reply to the interviewer with " have you?"

3.6% Wow

Surely being partisan is a given. As for his anger, maybe it shows a human side that would be useful in a supreme court justice (assuming one agrees with his conservative views and believes him over Ford).

Love Matt Damon's spoof and the others were pretty good too.

He really is the Bellend Overlord, isn't he?

Even if Ford's accusation was a "fake" created by the Democrats as you say, Ford can always say that her memory was imprecise because of the trauma arising from this "event" and in all likelihood, she will not be prosecuted. So Ford has nothing to lose either way in presenting her story and maintaining it was Kavanaugh who perpetrated the assault.

Unfortunately, the potential consequences for a "fake" witness to corroborate a story they know is not true is much more dire.

Ford claimed she had four witnesses and all of them testified under oath that they have no recollection of this party taking place (and Leland said she never even met Kavanaugh). Should one of these witnesses be lying (or fail to corroborate or make a "fake" corroboration as you put it) they would be guilty of a felony punishable by law.

This has NOTHING to do with the Dems being "clever" enough to come up with a fake witness but has everything to do with the fact that no individual would be THAT stupid to submit a false corroboration with such a stiff penalty.

Do you get it now???

When did that happen?

source for that? Mark Judge ,for example, had not done that all the way up to the hearing

Surely there's another possibility: that Ford's story is a fake by her own making, whether deliberately (e.g. to manipulate people close to her or to enhance her credibility if she wants to be seen professionally as an authority on sexual abuse) or not (e.g. because she was assaulted by someone else or because she has a false memory of assault created through dodgy therapy).

CNN: Christine Blasey Ford's prepared testimony

"In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail. I recall saying that the boy who assaulted me could someday be on the U.S. Supreme Court, and spoke a bit about his background at an elitist all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland. My husband recalls that I named my attacker as Brett Kavanaugh."

I find it hard to believe that she would have said that, unless one believes in second sight.

Then there's this:

Records Raise Questions About Ford's Double-Door Story

"So was the second door an escape for Christine Blasey Ford’s terrors or was documenting her terrors a ruse for sneaking a rental unit through tough local zoning ordinances?"

Why? It's not a criminal case. The FBI acts under the commission's direct order, authority and supervision, effectively in the commission's stead.

Initially Ford claimed that there 4 people at the party where the alleged assault took place who can corroborate that the party occurred. As we all know, there were only 3 in the room, according to Ford, when the alleged assault happened.

Judge has submitted two sworn statements (the second one is signed and written: by Mark Judge - under penalty of felony). I think Judge is fully aware of the consequences should he try and protect his old friend (to whom (according to Judge) he has not spoken in several years) and lie under oath. If Judge is lying, well then, he deserves what comes to him.

Sworn Statements are treated the same as testimony before the Committee...

So never under oath. Please try to be more accurate in future if you wish to be taken seriously.

he released a statement "under penalty of felony" which is not the same , and has even brought some banter amongst legal circles. Still not the same as being under oath.


2nd chance. source?