Fact or opinion? If fact, please show your working.
Fact or opinion? If fact, please show your working.

Why would Dems, of all people, disavow him?
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/06/p...ion/index.html

Even Susan Collins, in her speech to vote Kavanaugh into office referenced the ludicrous claims of Anenatti and his client:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/susan-...ding-kavanaugh

And here's the opinion of a decidedly liberal news outlet WaPo (just in case CNN was not liberal enough!): Remember, they were the ones to first publish Dr Ford's account...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.06235b0f858a


I think that is conclusive enough given the articles from liberal outlets...

Wrong again Marton! But I note on this political thread, there is a trend to cut down those who advocate a different view. I am not trolling as you would say. But I feel as though my view- because it differs from yours and many others on this thread, is being shut down. Therein lies the difference. It is very easy to shut down all who do not concur and render them speechless. Is that what this forum is really about? I am beginning to wonder...

You are shrilly hilarious. You have no idea of my political leanings. (I'll help you out a little: I come from a country where your American notions of "the left" and "the right" mean nothing, and where people tend to vote on issues rather than along party lines—and for your Information, I have never in my life voted for a candidate from what you would call "the left". It's Trump I find repugnant, not the GOP, and in any case Trump is about as far from Republican as you can get—as expected, given his harlequin political history.)

Who are these "Dems" who now blame Avenatti for Kavenaugh's appointment? (By the way, you really should learn how to use big words properly. So far, you've failed miserably with "impeachment" and "nomination", unless of course you are suggesting that Avenatti somehow caused Trump to propose Kavanaugh as a Justice of the Supreme Court.)

No, you haven't noted my comment "palpably proven causes", because that's not what I wrote. So now you need to add basic comprehension and accurate quoting to the list of items for you to brush up on. I wrote:

You got one word out of three right. And as is obvious to any reader with a little intelligence, the palpably provable case I was referring to was that of Donald Trump's pay-off of Stormy Daniels.

Next, when have I ever expressed any opinion about Swetnick? Please be so good as to show me the posts. And while you're doing that, feel free to detail the "lapses" you seem to think I have committed.

You wrote, "I could give a toss re "popularity" and my lack thereof". Indeed, I can see that, it troubles you greatly, and the fact that you don't understand what I mean by this sentence further underscores my previous point about comprehension.

"This forum should be an open discussion and respectful"—I literally laughed out loud when I read that. I'm looking forward to your open and respectful posts, going forward.

But if not, please keep getting your knickers in a twist. It's so much fun to watch!

Keep bullying 22yards..It is the one area in which you clearly excel!

PS Your political leanings and partisanship are fairly obvious given your commentary. But keep going. I too find this amusing... That you claim you are objective! What a laugh/joke!!

Stunning comeback. I'm lost for words.

Perhaps you should read the post that you just quoted. It seems you didn't understand my ever-so-subtle hint about my political leanings.

When have I ever claimed to be objective? I thought I made my subjective opinions on Trump pretty clear in my last post.

Are you going to answer any of the questions I raised, or is this going to devolve into a repeat of the "swearing under oath" fiasco?

You posted "Swetnick, whom you [22 yards] and Marton so willingly embraced."

Neither 22 yards nor I have ever posted about Swetnick!

So now it is time for you to withdraw your post about Swetnick.

BTW, I am also not objective.

I don't blame Avenatti, this is the old guard Democrats blaming others desperate to protect their base against the Progressive Movement.
I blame people career politicians, like Collins. What Collins did to women is despicable. She played to her base at the expense of the womens' movement. SHE MOCKED Christine Blaset Ford and women like her, she swept the platform from under the Me Too movement.
The truth is is that many men of Kavanugh's entitled club have a ' it's just high testosterone locker room spirits' attitude when it comes to sexual or physical attacks on women, or worse still attacks on girls. If Kavanaugh was black or poor the verdict would be different. Cosby got caught, Kavanaigh didn't, Cosby will still probably get a light sentence due to his money and influence. Money, colour, class talks
Feinstein played her hand badly in the game of politics. She must go.
The charges against Kavanaugh could not be proved, what was proved was that there was doubt, and that this doubt about his character was reinforced by his vile rhetoric under questioning. His demeanor is unbecoming of a judge of any court, but especially not of the Supreme Court of the most powerful country in the world.
And that is why Collins should have followed brave Republican senator Lisa Murkowski from Alaska and voted NO!
It is shocking, the U.S. is being governed by a Mad Hatter's Tea Party. It is all a charade, a sham sh show to dupe the ignorant populace while all democratic and civil rights are eroded and power put firmly in the hands of the top 1%. Even Democrats like Collins are out to save their own necks and tread on the most vulnerable members of society, to turn her back on the disadvantaged sex merely to retain position.
It is painful, humiliating, shameful, despicable, unconscionable. Collins must go!
Watch for January, I led the Womens Oakland March onto the stage last year. I will again join the womens' January march. This debauchery has to stop. The figure of Justice is a women for a reason, it is time all woke and answered the call. As Prudentia she hold a mirror and a snake, as Justice the scales and a sword. So it is time to look in the mirror, feel the snake, chop of its head and lay it on the balance of crimes against women.
Like Ruth Ginsberg quoted
" True to fiery form, Ginsburg starts off the trailer with a take-no-prisoners quote from 19th-century feminist and abolitionist Sarah Grimké. "I ask no favor for my sex," she gravely intones. "All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.”

I agree with most of what you said, but the fact is that Susan Collins is
A) Republican, although quite moderate by today's standards, and
B) not up for re-election

She didn't need to save her neck. She could have stuck it out for principle and voted no. There are probably dozens of other judges that would be suited to sit on the Supreme Court, so it's not like this nominee was the best candidate ever and they had to have him.

However, now she's going to become a target for the Democrats in 2020. Fine, but it's going to be another circus side show that detracts from other important issues.

WTAF?!!!!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45793524


So now the POTUS is judge and jury?

Well, a couple of opinion pieces sure showed me the facts.

Or perhaps you should stop feeding the troll ...

Are you forgetting the FBI investigation? This would never end up before a court because there is no case to answer.

The 5 day, limited investigation? There are plenty of arguments for not impugning the character of Kavanaugh (at least in terms of sexual misdeeds), but we both know the FBI 'investigation' was nothing more than a sop for optics' sake.

We both know nothing because the results of the investigation haven't been published. What I will say though is that when the FBI investigate Trump they're wonderful, when they investigate Kavanaugh they're bent. Besides, how long does one need to investigate something where the alleged victim doesn't know when it took place, doesn't know where it took place, doesn't remember any of the details and every witness that's been provided has said that her story isn't true?

The FBI investigation was not bent, it was "limited".

None of the witnesses said "her story isn't true" and if they did they would not be credible because they could not possibly know if her story was not true. They did say they could not confirm her story but that is a very long way from saying her story was not true!

There were three alleged victims (now four) and the FBI were only allowed to investigate two of them.

Whereas the IMF forecast is much lower due to Trump's trade war.
Source

The September quarter GDP figure should be published before the midterms; will it be up or down!

I'm more of the opinion that when the FBI are allowed to do their job, independently, that's great. Whether it is investigating Hillary's emails or Trump's shady practices or Kavanaugh's wandering willy. The important thing in each case surely has to be that they are given time and resource to follow things through to their natural conclusion, not set unrealistic deadlines that don't allow even basic things like the contacting of all witnesses and accusers.

Is it fitting for the office of POTUS to comment in such a manner regarding this? It's a contentious issue at best, and when I think of the issues where the POTUS has said nothing, to comment on this feels incredibly wrong.