We know she lied about flying.

We know she hid her social media accounts.

We know Ford claimed that she wanted to remain private but took a lie detector a week after the letter and wel before her letter was released.

We know she lied about hearing the conversation in the hallway.

We know that every single witness to this event said it didn’t happen or they didn’t know what she’s talking about.

We know she’s changed the number of people at the party.

We know she said that not everything can be considered “truthful”.

We know these things, but we’re expected to believe her accusations? You actually have to discard this evidence in order to believe Ford. For those that believe Ford, what part of her testimony convinced you and what do you say about the inconsistencies?

---

I don't understand you man. You sit here and pretend like you are so repulsed by the games the democrats are playing knowing damn well they don't care about the "victim" you care so much about and are using this extra week to find additional "witnesses".

At the risk of not sounding like even more of a hypocrite than you already are, do you feel like a week long "investigation" will give you the convincing you need for Kavanaugh to be "innocent"?

No. I believe he committed an act of sexual assault against Dr. Ford. I've already explained my rationale for doing so, and based upon that rationale, virtually nothing is going to change that belief at this point.

If changing your mind about something makes one a hypocrite, we're all horrible people.

For a moment let's pretend that everything she has stated is true.  Are you willing to hold an underage drinker responsible for an indiscretion that happened 30 plus years ago with no apparent corroborating evidence that this is a pattern of behavior?  Were you or have you been a saint your entire life?  Have you no regrets for anything you have done in your past that if given the chance you would change?  The hypocrisy here is astounding.  I am not the same person I was in 1980 as I am this day.  I will not be the same person in 5 or 10 years.  Neither are you!  Stop pretending this is about Kavanaugh and has everything to do with the politics of the ideology of whom sits on the Supreme Court.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

No. I believe he committed an act of sexual assault against Dr. Ford. I've already explained my rationale for doing so, and based upon that rationale, virtually nothing is going to change that belief at this point.

If changing your mind about something makes one a hypocrite, we're all horrible people.

For a moment let's pretend that everything she has stated is true.  Are you willing to hold an underage drinker responsible for an indiscretion that happened 30 plus years ago

Yes, if it's sexual assault.

---

I predict the Safeway bagboy timesheets from July, 1982 will be the smoking gun.

Just gotta hope the microfilm is still in good shape after all these years.

Our nation's future depends on it.

---

For a moment let's pretend that everything she has stated is true.  Are you willing to hold an underage drinker responsible for an indiscretion that happened 30 plus years ago

Yes, if it's sexual assault.

And much like the party you claim to not represent edited the question to fit your narrative.  Well done.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Here’s how an FBI investigation would go:

1. FBI interviews Ford and Kavanaugh; they repeat what was said to congress
2. FBI interviews Judge and other witnesses; they repeat what they said to congress (by letter)
3. FBI presents their testimony to Congress
4. Congress makes a decision based on testimony that they already heard but this time from the FBI

Anyone see a problem with this?

Ultimately, not a single vote is going to be changed by this sham of an investigation.  This is just a delay tactic that the democrats have played.  Flake isn't a man of conscience.  He's a guy who hates Trump, and will do anything he can to undermine him.  He's not running for reelection because he wasn't going to win based on that Trump hatred.  This is just his parting shot at Trump on his way out the door.

Even if the FBI goes and discovers that every accusation was manufactured for political purpose, the democrats are still going to oppose it and vote no at the end of the day.  That's what hyper-partisan looks like.  The funny thing is that the evil republicans usually are more deferential when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.  I'm being nice there.  They simply don't have the sack to pull the kinds of stunts democrats do, so you see justices like Kagan or Sotomayor getting republican votes.  You won't see that from democrats with Kavanaugh, yet those two are as ideologically leftist as it gets.

I think it can be more accurately characterized as the democrats have a moral and ethical flexibility that you don't see often on the right. It's no secret they view those who don't ideologically agree with them as inferior. Concocting lies and deception to take down a foe, especially one who doesn't agree completely with their most sacred conviction of abortion, is not seen as a lapse of integrity, but an act of honor. It's not enough to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed. His esteem, personal and professional reputation, and above all, his family, must be annihilated for the sake of ideology.

---

No. I believe he committed an act of sexual assault against Dr. Ford. I've already explained my rationale for doing so, and based upon that rationale, virtually nothing is going to change that belief at this point.

If changing your mind about something makes one a hypocrite, we're all horrible people.

For a moment let's pretend that everything she has stated is true.  Are you willing to hold an underage drinker responsible for an indiscretion that happened 30 plus years ago with no apparent corroborating evidence that this is a pattern of behavior?  Were you or have you been a saint your entire life?  Have you no regrets for anything you have done in your past that if given the chance you would change?  The hypocrisy here is astounding.  I am not the same person I was in 1980 as I am this day.  I will not be the same person in 5 or 10 years.  Neither are you!  Stop pretending this is about Kavanaugh and has everything to do with the politics of the ideology of whom sits on the Supreme Court.

I would hold a person who was aware (or should reasonably have been aware) of their actions responsible for sexual assault for the rest of their life, regardless of what age that assault was committed at.

Better?

---

And for me, this is absolutely about Kavanaugh. I believe Dr. Ford. If this were really about party lines, would I be over here wishing Amy Coney Barrett upon Democrats for the [BLEEP] they pulled?

---

For a moment let's pretend that everything she has stated is true.  Are you willing to hold an underage drinker responsible for an indiscretion that happened 30 plus years ago with no apparent corroborating evidence that this is a pattern of behavior?  Were you or have you been a saint your entire life?  Have you no regrets for anything you have done in your past that if given the chance you would change?  The hypocrisy here is astounding.  I am not the same person I was in 1980 as I am this day.  I will not be the same person in 5 or 10 years.  Neither are you!  Stop pretending this is about Kavanaugh and has everything to do with the politics of the ideology of whom sits on the Supreme Court.

I would hold a person who was aware (or should reasonably have been aware) of their actions responsible for sexual assault for the rest of their life, regardless of what age that assault was committed at.

Better?

---

And for me, this is absolutely about Kavanaugh. I believe Dr. Ford. If this were really about party lines, would I be over here wishing Amy Coney Barrett upon Democrats for the [BLEEP] they pulled?

So you are the same person you were at 15 as you are now?  Because 15 year old TJBender participating in underage drinking would act at all like current TJBender?  You are delusional at best.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I would hold a person who was aware (or should reasonably have been aware) of their actions responsible for sexual assault for the rest of their life, regardless of what age that assault was committed at.

Better?

---

And for me, this is absolutely about Kavanaugh. I believe Dr. Ford. If this were really about party lines, would I be over here wishing Amy Coney Barrett upon Democrats for the [BLEEP] they pulled?

So you are the same person you were at 15 as you are now?  Because 15 year old TJBender participating in underage drinking would act at all like current TJBender?  You are delusional at best.

No, I'm not the same person now that I was at age 15, and I never claimed to be. But if I had tried to rape someone at age 15, that should and would stick with me for the rest of my life. Why are you trying so hard to make excuses for a man who was one panty-snatch away from being a rapist? If someone had done the same thing to your daughter 36 years ago, exact same thing, and your daughter told you for the first time recently, would you support that person being on the Supreme Court?

There's a level of decency expected of a normal human being, and then there's the level expected of a Supreme Court justice. If I had even the slightest doubt that someone up for nomination to the Supreme Court had attempted to rape someone, no way in hell do I want them on that bench. Your line of questioning here seems to acknowledge that you think the claims are at least plausible, based upon your asking me if I'm the same person I was at 15 rather than saying it's all a left-wing conspiracy that I'm somehow part of. So why, then, are you so determined to make excuses for someone that you acknowledge might have attempted to rape someone else?

---

So you are the same person you were at 15 as you are now?  Because 15 year old TJBender participating in underage drinking would act at all like current TJBender?  You are delusional at best.

No, I'm not the same person now that I was at age 15, and I never claimed to be. But if I had tried to rape someone at age 15, that should and would stick with me for the rest of my life. Why are you trying so hard to make excuses for a man who was one panty-snatch away from being a rapist? If someone had done the same thing to your daughter 36 years ago, exact same thing, and your daughter told you for the first time recently, would you support that person being on the Supreme Court?

There's a level of decency expected of a normal human being, and then there's the level expected of a Supreme Court justice. If I had even the slightest doubt that someone up for nomination to the Supreme Court had attempted to rape someone, no way in hell do I want them on that bench. Your line of questioning here seems to acknowledge that you think the claims are at least plausible, based upon your asking me if I'm the same person I was at 15 rather than saying it's all a left-wing conspiracy that I'm somehow part of. So why, then, are you so determined to make excuses for someone that you acknowledge might have attempted to rape someone else?

Again, going by the allegations and assuming they are true the picture you paint is not even close to what you represent.  Drunken underage teenagers grabbing a boob is now attempted rape?  

For the record, I have a daughter and a son.  I am looking at both sides of the situation and in doing so if I were to take everything she is saying at 100% face value there are so many holes in her statements that any reasonable person would be asking questions.  Yet you believe her even when her best friend at the time doesn't even back her "recollections".

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

We know she lied about flying.

We know she hid her social media accounts.

We know Ford claimed that she wanted to remain private but took a lie detector a week after the letter and wel before her letter was released.

We know she lied about hearing the conversation in the hallway.

We know that every single witness to this event said it didn’t happen or they didn’t know what she’s talking about.

We know she’s changed the number of people at the party.

We know she said that not everything can be considered “truthful”.

We know these things, but we’re expected to believe her accusations? You actually have to discard this evidence in order to believe Ford. For those that believe Ford, what part of her testimony convinced you and what do you say about the inconsistencies?

Its about emotional identification not reason.  Any reasonable prosecutor would tell u thus fact pattern doesn't support a warrant let alone an extrajurisdictional FBI investigation of a 36 year old non incident.

---

So you are the same person you were at 15 as you are now?  Because 15 year old TJBender participating in underage drinking would act at all like current TJBender?  You are delusional at best.

No, I'm not the same person now that I was at age 15, and I never claimed to be. But if I had tried to rape someone at age 15, that should and would stick with me for the rest of my life. Why are you trying so hard to make excuses for a man who was one panty-snatch away from being a rapist? If someone had done the same thing to your daughter 36 years ago, exact same thing, and your daughter told you for the first time recently, would you support that person being on the Supreme Court?

There's a level of decency expected of a normal human being, and then there's the level expected of a Supreme Court justice. If I had even the slightest doubt that someone up for nomination to the Supreme Court had attempted to rape someone, no way in hell do I want them on that bench. Your line of questioning here seems to acknowledge that you think the claims are at least plausible, based upon your asking me if I'm the same person I was at 15 rather than saying it's all a left-wing conspiracy that I'm somehow part of. So why, then, are you so determined to make excuses for someone that you acknowledge might have attempted to rape someone else?

The difference being that I, as my daughter's father,  would call her on her bull [BLEEP] story.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

No, I'm not the same person now that I was at age 15, and I never claimed to be. But if I had tried to rape someone at age 15, that should and would stick with me for the rest of my life. Why are you trying so hard to make excuses for a man who was one panty-snatch away from being a rapist? If someone had done the same thing to your daughter 36 years ago, exact same thing, and your daughter told you for the first time recently, would you support that person being on the Supreme Court?

There's a level of decency expected of a normal human being, and then there's the level expected of a Supreme Court justice. If I had even the slightest doubt that someone up for nomination to the Supreme Court had attempted to rape someone, no way in hell do I want them on that bench. Your line of questioning here seems to acknowledge that you think the claims are at least plausible, based upon your asking me if I'm the same person I was at 15 rather than saying it's all a left-wing conspiracy that I'm somehow part of. So why, then, are you so determined to make excuses for someone that you acknowledge might have attempted to rape someone else?

The difference being that I, as my daughter's father,  would call her on her bull [BLEEP] story.

It's easy to be the father of the year on the internet, but a lot tougher to do it to her face.

---

I would hold a person who was aware (or should reasonably have been aware) of their actions responsible for sexual assault for the rest of their life, regardless of what age that assault was committed at.

Better?

---

And for me, this is absolutely about Kavanaugh. I believe Dr. Ford. If this were really about party lines, would I be over here wishing Amy Coney Barrett upon Democrats for the [BLEEP] they pulled?

So you are the same person you were at 15 as you are now?  Because 15 year old TJBender participating in underage drinking would act at all like current TJBender?  You are delusional at best.

One point of clarification, and not a minor one. Kavanaugh was 17, Ford 15 when the alleged assault occurred. Those 2 years are a big difference in maturity both physical and mental. If he did it, and you don't want to hold it against him now, fine. But to put her through that, and lie about it now, hanging her out to dry? Hell, no. I expect a certain character from a member of the SCOTUS. Own up, take your medicine, apologize.

After his hissy fit against character smearing Democrats, Clinton retribution and Anti-Trump sentiment being behind his current predicament, there damn sure better be nothing to the accusations. It's hard to imagine him being impartial if anything Mueller drops ends up on the SCOTUS docket.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

The difference being that I, as my daughter's father,  would call her on her bull [BLEEP] story.

It's easy to be the father of the year on the internet, but a lot tougher to do it to her face.

Not really, emotion doesn't override reason for everyone the way it does for you.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's easy to be the father of the year on the internet, but a lot tougher to do it to her face.

Not really, emotion doesn't override reason for everyone the way it does for you.

Emotion is based upon what we see and experience throughout the course of our lives. I haven't led as sheltered a life, apparently.

---

Not really, emotion doesn't override reason for everyone the way it does for you.

Emotion is based upon what we see and experience throughout the course of our lives. I haven't led as sheltered a life, apparently.

Uve sheltered urself from the facts in this case.

---

Not really, emotion doesn't override reason for everyone the way it does for you.

Emotion is based upon what we see and experience throughout the course of our lives. I haven't led as sheltered a life, apparently.

Emotion is instinct devoid of reason, and trusting it as you have leads to faulty conclusions such as the one you've expressed here. It's why we deal in facts not beliefs, and the facts in thiis case reject rather than confirm yours.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Not really, emotion doesn't override reason for everyone the way it does for you.

Emotion is based upon what we see and experience throughout the course of our lives. I haven't led as sheltered a life, apparently.

Emotion is for the weak and the stupid. Too stupid to see through emotion and get to logic and rationality.. too weak to do the same.

---

Ultimately, not a single vote is going to be changed by this sham of an investigation.  This is just a delay tactic that the democrats have played.  Flake isn't a man of conscience.  He's a guy who hates Trump, and will do anything he can to undermine him.  He's not running for reelection because he wasn't going to win based on that Trump hatred.  This is just his parting shot at Trump on his way out the door.

Even if the FBI goes and discovers that every accusation was manufactured for political purpose, the democrats are still going to oppose it and vote no at the end of the day.  That's what hyper-partisan looks like.  The funny thing is that the evil republicans usually are more deferential when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.  I'm being nice there.  They simply don't have the sack to pull the kinds of stunts democrats do, so you see justices like Kagan or Sotomayor getting republican votes.  You won't see that from democrats with Kavanaugh, yet those two are as ideologically leftist as it gets.

I think it can be more accurately characterized as the democrats have a moral and ethical flexibility that you don't see often on the right. It's no secret they view those who don't ideologically agree with them as inferior. Concocting lies and deception to take down a foe, especially one who doesn't agree completely with their most sacred conviction of abortion, is not seen as a lapse of integrity, but an act of honor. It's not enough to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed. His esteem, personal and professional reputation, and above all, his family, must be annihilated for the sake of ideology.

Boom. Mic Drop. Conversation done. Homebiscuit has summed up the entire left-leaning sect of society.

---

We're about to put a man who committed sexual assault on the Supreme Court.

Nice work, Republicans. And good job Democrats holding back key info in a political ploy.

---

No one got owned. Jeff Flake's last remarks said it all. Everyone (except those who made their minds up long ago that Kavanaugh would be on the Court no matter what) is going to have a hard time with this one.

We're about to put the victim of a false accusation of sexual assault on the Supreme Court. Now that the Dems have failed with this lying fraudulent deceitful and downright evil tactic TWICE in your lifetime I wonder what disgusting antics they'll stoop to next year when we get to do this for Trump's RBG replacement?

This is why the man does not belong on the Supreme Court. There is no consensus on whether the guy is guilty or innocent. The nation is once again divided. I have absolutely no allegiance to either party and I still don't know who to believe, but when it comes to these sort of things, I tend to lean towards the accuser for safe measure. I don't want sexual predators out there roaming the streets. With that said, I am not 100% leaning one way or the other. It's more like 51% it happened to 49% it didn't and that isn't enough for me to definitively say one way or the other. I am of the opinion that anyone with such accusations, should NEVER be appointed to the highest, most respected court in the land. For God's sake, if he doesn't make it through, all Trump has to do is nominate another one of "his guys". He has all the power in this situation. He can just keep nominating people he wants until they get through. By pushing this one guy, he's just tainting the reputation of the court itself. I don't know why Republicans are taking such a hard line stance. They have the advantage. It also doesn't help that Supreme Court Judges are supposed to be impartial to political parties and Kavanaugh went on about some left wing conspiracy against him by people opposed to Trump and the Clinton's as well. For this alone, he should be taken out of the equation. He showed his cards. That's a no-no.

---