Jump to content

⚖️ SCOTUS


RETIREDFAN1

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, ScreamingEagle said:

Quick question. Where exactly did she say that she used a cell phone to call a friend after the attack?

I never clarified when I posted this, but the point of this was how easily it is to make stuff up to change the narrative.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestHardinfan1 said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christine-blasey-ford-ex-boyfriend-says-she-helped-friend-prep-for-potential-polygraph-grassley-sounds-alarm

In a separate letter to Democratic Sen. Chris Coons, who also sits on the Judiciary Committee, Grassley wrote, "The accuser freely admits to having no evidence whatsoever that Judge Kavanaugh even attended this party. … We’ve reached a new level of absurdity with this allegation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breaking: ... Ford's ex-boyfriend said she lied under oath during the senate hearing when she said she never coached anybody about how to take a polygraph test ... she testified she had never done so ... her boyfriend said he personally witnessed her coaching someone how to "pass" a polygraph .... her credibility is crumbling day by day ... 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36620/bombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedra

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-sworn-statement-alleges-ford-lied-under-oath-about-prepping-someone-for-a-polygraph

Edited by KirtFalcon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, KirtFalcon said:

Breaking: ... Ford's ex-boyfriend said she lied under oath during the senate hearing when she said she never coached anybody about how to take a polygraph test ... she testified she had never done so ... her boyfriend said he personally witnessed her coaching someone how to "pass" a polygraph .... her credibility is crumbling day by day ... 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36620/bombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedra

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-sworn-statement-alleges-ford-lied-under-oath-about-prepping-someone-for-a-polygraph

Late, as usual.....lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • √ Phase 1 – Activate last minute delay chaos (prior “Me Too” investment).
  • √ Phase 2 – Use sex assault claims to demand investigation, further delay. Use republicans, not democrats, to establish/frame the delay.
  • √ Phase 3 – Use investigation to frame validity narrative; further delay.  Use republican fear (leverage Jeff Flake) not democrats, to continue the delay. Manipulate FBI. Shift investigation goalposts.   <=WE ARE HERE
  • Phase 4 – Use “deeply flawed investigation” narrative (witnesses ignored); to isolate Murkowski/Collins and keep Flake in position.  Drum mid-term “Let the voters decide”.
  • Phase 5 – The mid-term election.

We are at Phase 4 now.  I saw this today :  https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/10/03/more-than-40-potential-sources-have-not-been-contacted-by-the-fbi-in-kavanaugh-investigation/23549713/  .  The only people the F.B.I. should contact are those that were in attendance at both parties the accusers mentioned, and their close friends at the time.  The shouldn't be interviewing character witness past those times.  If they interview the people I mentioned then I believe it will be a thorough investigation, and not clouded by statements who didn't know about them until 30 years later or 10 years later for that matter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that the slime ball dimocrats have been beaten back and it looks like Judge Kavanaugh will be seated on the SC, all eyes turn to soon to retire/expire Ruth "Buzzy" Ginsburg and who President Trump will nominate to fill her seat.  Everyone will be clamoring for a woman to replace her and the odds on favorite has to be:

Amy Coney Barrett

ACBarrett-940x626.jpg

She was one of the finalists this past round, many believing she was the runner-up ...

The dimocrats have taken the confirmation process to unthinkable gutter politics and character assassination.  The question is, will they do the same thing to a woman nominee?  Will they stoop that low because she is a conservative and will be another strict Constitutional conservative on the court?  

Will Upchuck Scumbag and Little Dick Durbin bring pimps out of the woodwork claiming she was a hooker and in their harem when she was a struggling teen?  Did she have wild pajama parties with sex toys and boys?  Has she secretly done a porno movie?  Did she molest young boys?  Will Diane Frankenstein get another secret letter and hold it until they are ready to vote?  Who knows what the low life dims will come up with to accuse her of .... or will they lay off because she is a woman? .... 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...