It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ford - Kavanaugh Hearings 9-27-18

page: 169
79
<< 166  167  168    170  171  172 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

He's a good enough guy that literally everyone who knew him has come out to support him including his ex GFS, and literally zero people that knew him have come out against him.

Everything else you said is partisan BS.




posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Identified

Her statement she swore to for the polygraph said there were a couple of girls with her. So we know it's untrue because she herself said there was only 1 girl with her not a couple of girls there.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

So truth and honesty is partisan? No wonder the country is screwed up.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

So truth and honesty is partisan? No wonder the country is screwed up.

What truth and honesty do you refer to. The only one we know can have been truthful is Kavanaugh as Ford has changed her story numerous times.

I would say the 60 people we factually know knew him is truth and honesty. Why don't you?
edit on 29-9-2018 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Identified
a reply to: amazing

I don't recall high school yearbooks being questioned before. Or whether someone drank during the week, as if those asking have never been near Dupont Circle during happy hour on a weekday.

I'm not bothered by someone not being particularly forthcoming when asked about ralphing and boofing during a SCOTUS confirmation.

I am, however, very bothered that this is to be considered the new standard of questioning.

Unless the next was in a coma for the last 40 years I suspect they too won't answer every ridiculous question just the way everyone wants.



Look up some of the details of the Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Justin Brandais( spelling?), Douglas Ginsberg, and Harlld Carswell. And those are just the tip of the iceberg. It's always been like this. The only difference is now we have the internet and things are easier to find and information is easier to share.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

What came out from their yearbook?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Identified

Her statement she swore to for the polygraph said there were a couple of girls with her. So we know it's untrue because she herself said there was only 1 girl with her not a couple of girls there.


I suspect that this story was created...thus she happened to make that statement in the third person due to re-reading her script over and over again. If it was first hand account, she would not make such an error.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I am not referring to the ford incident (other than I had not thought of an accusation as a deal breaker for me). I was referring to his actions during questioning.

edit:

I base my thought of qualification on more then a single incident. I suppose it is a new approach.
edit on 9/29/2018 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: amazing

What came out from their yearbook?


I'm not arguing anything specific. I'm just saying that supreme court nominations have always been this dirty (even if the dirt they dig up isn't from a year book). Look em up. They always try to dig up dirt and when they can't they do anything in their power to delay the vote, like with Merrick Garland.
edit on 29-9-2018 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

The actions of a man angry at partisan attacks trying to destroy his family. Exactly what I expect from a man.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Y'all were fine thinking HRC was qualified for President of the United States but dont think Kavanaugh is qualified to be a supreme court justice? What?

A2D
edit on 29-9-2018 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

They can be dirty. But this one is the worst.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: roadgravel

The actions of a man angry at partisan attacks trying to destroy his family. Exactly what I expect from a man.


In that case the truth is the right path. To each his own.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I am not referring to the ford incident (other than I had not thought of an accusation as a deal breaker for me). I was referring to his actions during questioning.

edit:

I base my thought of qualification on more then a single incident. I suppose it is a new approach.
hilarious. You list one incident as the reason then say it's based on more than one reason.

Sorry, it's one, it's called partisan politics.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

I am the nicest person in the world but if you try to destroy my family to further a political agenda you will see fire. Don't screw with a person's life and family.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

You know...Its all part of the deep state plot. LOL



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I don't think you know what partisan means.

I was going to do one last comment to further explain the points I was trying to pass on but I can see it is a waste of time.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: roadgravel

I am the nicest person in the world but if you try to destroy my family to further a political agenda you will see fire. Don't screw with a person's life and family.


I am the same. IMO,. BK should have made something like this part of his opening statement yesterday.

"You can trash me all you wish, I'm a professional and can take it. However, when you attack my family, my wife, and my daughters, I will fight back to protect them and their honor. Know this, any anger or frustration I may exhibit today is directly linked to protecting my wife and children. I hope we can all keep that in mind and act in an honorable fashion at this hearing."



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




I am the nicest person in the world


Can you give 60 people names to back that up. LOL. A murderer can probably also do that and have in the past.

Anyway, good luck the rants.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Brandeis was only really notable because it was the first public hearings and they allowed a free for all on testimony and didn't progress quickly to a floor vote. It certainly set a standard for dragging their heals.

Bork's questions were all about his role in the Watergate Crisis, this views on the Civil Rights Act and gender equality. All based on his professional papers. That is no where near questioning someone about their high school year book.

I think we all know Thomas was a new low when they paraded in ex boyfriends and coworkers. That wasn't acceptable and it certainly should not be the new standard going forward just because it was done in the past.







 
79
<< 166  167  168    170  171  172 >>

log in

join