Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Shapiro gets this right. Please skip if you are done with BK stuff.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Technically, they aren't hearsay, they are first-person accusations. They are plausible accusations, come from credible persons, and are tangentially corroborated by outside sources. They should be taken seriously and investigated further. That there is a rush to skirt past them by BK and his supporters, is telling.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ He may well be lying, so might she. The fact remains all these allegations are hearsay with no credible evidence and that hearsay is being used to discredit him.
Yet Gorsuch sailed through confirmation, with several Dems voting for him. This is about BK's character, not his politics.This whole charade has been designed by democrats to delay his confirmation until after the mid-terms. As I said it's a political witch hunt.
Define 'personal feelings.'Your personal feelings as to whether Kavanaugh is suitable for the supreme court are neither here nor there.
You really quite obtuse -- the standards of proof for a criminal or civil trial do not apply here. A lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land should not be rushed, especially when the character and trustworthiness of the candidate is in question. If any doubt remains, then the Senate should err on the side of caution and select another nominee. BK has no right to this appointment.Blasey Ford nor anyone else can prove these allegations, therefore he is innocent of all charges until proven guilty so they should not figure in his "Job Interview".
If BK is so squeaky clean, why doesn't he want an FBI investigation into the four allegations against him?If the democrats or Blasey Ford want an FBI investigation then why don't they serve formal charges against him? They know nothing will come of it that's why. Again, a political witch hunt deliberately designed to frustrate Trump.
Again, why then was there no 'witch hunt' to frustrate trump with Gorsuch?
I'm wondering if you've ever experienced a truly traumatic, life-threatening event in your life, to be so unrealistic about how memories and trauma actually work.Frankly I'm astonished you are so adamant she is telling the truth and he wasn't. I thought his testimony was the more credible, she appeared to be being coached and there were way too many inconstancies, for example her so called fear of flying even though she on her own admission often flies long distances.
As for inconsistencies, BK's bullshit golden child story takes the cake.
If you are serious about exploring this issue, and not just on a bitch-be-lyin'-and-got-full-custody-from-me rag, take a look at these varied analyses of yesterday's testimonies, then get back to us:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ate-220741
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Woot. I would lose a lot of Facebook friends if I posted this. Her story is very very weak. She was in a house that she did not remember, but she remembered the neighborhood. The neighborhood was too far from her home to walk to or from.... but... she can't remember how she got to the party or got home. She did remember she had exactly one beer however. More than a bit odd I think.
but... she really could be telling the truth. I am a bit more convinced by BK, but I think you are a fool if you think you can be certain of either of these two.
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I really couldn't give a monkeys whether BK becomes a supreme court judge or not I am merely pointing out the obvious that these allegations do not prove Jack shit. Matters not now anyway as it seems the dems have got their wish and it will now be delayed while the FBI investigate.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ If you are serious about exploring this issue, and not just on a bitch-be-lyin'-and-got-full-custody-from-me rag, take a look at these varied analyses of yesterday's testimonies, then get back to us:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
and I didn't realize Matt's blood runs true Democrat blue.
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Does falling 65 feet off a roof count? or nearly being hit by a swinging skip of concrete? or being set on fire by an exploding oil heater? or being run over by a hit & run driver when you were a child?Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ I'm wondering if you've ever experienced a truly traumatic, life-threatening event in your life, to be so unrealistic about how memories and trauma actually work.
If so then the answer is YES.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
This is a neat part of Ford's testimony. She can't even remember how she communicated with the Washington Post reporter just weeks ago. I mean... she can't remember if she gave the reporter documents or not. WTF? It is really odd. Maybe I am missing something, but it just makes no sense.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Here's a strange coincidence: I started watching Captain Disappointment videos and found this bit that is relevant to this forum. I wonder if he is one of the regulars here:
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I have a list of 65 people that didn't see those things happen to you so you must be lying. :Pshoutinghorse wrote: ↑Does falling 65 feet off a roof count? or nearly being hit by a swinging skip of concrete? or being set on fire by an exploding oil heater? or being run over by a hit & run driver when you were a child?Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ I'm wondering if you've ever experienced a truly traumatic, life-threatening event in your life, to be so unrealistic about how memories and trauma actually work.
If so then the answer is YES.
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
:lol: :clap: Bravo Sir.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Oh thank god.
The FBI always gets their penis.
The FBI always gets their penis.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Wait. Wait. The SJWs whined and complained that when a woman expresses emotion, she is considered hysterical. Damn social rules. Men are allowed to show emotion.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:37 amFrankly, I'm astonished that any objective observer could watch the calm, articulate testimony of Blasey-Ford, then the petulant, abrasive temper tantrum of Bart Boof, and conclude that the former is delusional/a lying bitch while the latter is honest, calm, a beacon of ethical standards, with an even keel and impeccable sense of objectivity.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... gress.html
But not all of you are objective, now are you?
Kavanaugh gets angry that he is accused of multiple gang rapes, and he is pilloried for showing emotion. You have to pick one. It can't be both.
Is showing emotion good or bad when discussing very serious matters? How do we apply this standard according to gender. I am that strange person who doesn't want to bring gender into it, but the SJWs have replaced evidence with their own standards.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I read this through. The base question (who do you find more credible?) strikes me as odd. Apparent credibility is a poor substitute for “does the case against BK meet a reasonable test, and what are the KPIs for reasonable”
To wit:
:bjarte:Michele Landis Dauber is the Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law at Stanford Law School.
Whom do you find more credible?
In the end, it was the laughter Ford remembered. Being humiliated, her pain and terror as sport for these two prep school bullies. And a million hearts broke simultaneously. A million tears slid down a million cheeks and we knew, just like we knew about Brock Turner. She could have saved the cost of the lie detector.
:bjarte:Victoria Bassetti is a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. She was a Democratic subcommittee chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Whom do you find more credible?
I found Ford more credible. She was calm and collected. In contrast, Kavanaugh was angry, confrontational and at times rambling. He was openly partisan, even threatening.
:bjarte:Mari Matsuda is a law professor at the University of Hawaii's William S. Richardson School of Law.
Whom do you find more credible?
Whom do you believe when two witnesses testify with earnest commitment to their irreconcilable positions, showing real emotion, and apparent sincerity? I believe Ford. Not because she is the woman, not because she represents “my side” in open political warfare, but because of the indicia of truth that emanate from the totality of the evidence.
Then you get this crazy chick going off script:
:think:Elizabeth Price Foley is Professor of Law at the Florida International University College of Law.
Applying the preponderance standard to the allegations levied against Kavanaugh, is it more likely than not that he sexually assaulted Ford? No rational decision-maker could so find, for numerous reasons.
First, Ford’s allegations are vague in numerous material details, including time, place and number of individuals present at the alleged event. Second, all individuals Ford claims were present at the event have denied, under penalty of perjury, that it ever took place, including one of Ford’s best girlfriends, Leland Ingram Keyser. Third, Kavanaugh has unequivocally denied ever attending any such event, or ever assaulting Ford at any time. Thus, all alleged participants at the event, except for Ford, agree that the event—much less the sexual assault—never even happened. Fourth, hundreds of character witnesses—many of them women—have provided statements regarding Kavanaugh’s exemplary character since childhood, including his respect for, and long-time mentorship of, women.
....
In short, under the totality of the evidence adduced, there is no rational evidence that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted anyone, including Ford. While some may choose to believe Ford for various reasons—such as believing women, believing Democrats, hating Donald Trump or believing all allegations of sexual assault—such beliefs, while passionately held, are not rational credibility determinations but biased ones. They would never be accepted in any court, or in any other fair decision-making process of a civilized society.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
How is someone supposed to remember something that happened a few weeks ago?John D wrote: ↑ This is a neat part of Ford's testimony. She can't even remember how she communicated with the Washington Post reporter just weeks ago. I mean... she can't remember if she gave the reporter documents or not. WTF? It is really odd. Maybe I am missing something, but it just makes no sense.
Instead, we should believe without corroboration something they think happened nearly forty years ago, give or take.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Society lectures us endlessly that women who express emotion are as evil as Goody Proctor, but men who express emotion are unhinged, even though society also teaches men that not expressing emotion is part of toxic masculinity, so the suspect should be in jail if male because I lost track and should receive no punishment if femal because of Cosby and Polanski.Brive1987 wrote: ↑I read this through. The base question (who do you find more credible?) strikes me as odd. Apparent credibility is a poor substitute for “does the case against BK meet a reasonable test, and what are the KPIs for reasonable”
To wit:
:bjarte:Michele Landis Dauber is the Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law at Stanford Law School.
Whom do you find more credible?
In the end, it was the laughter Ford remembered. Being humiliated, her pain and terror as sport for these two prep school bullies. And a million hearts broke simultaneously. A million tears slid down a million cheeks and we knew, just like we knew about Brock Turner. She could have saved the cost of the lie detector.
:bjarte:Victoria Bassetti is a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. She was a Democratic subcommittee chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Whom do you find more credible?
I found Ford more credible. She was calm and collected. In contrast, Kavanaugh was angry, confrontational and at times rambling. He was openly partisan, even threatening.
:bjarte:Mari Matsuda is a law professor at the University of Hawaii's William S. Richardson School of Law.
Whom do you find more credible?
Whom do you believe when two witnesses testify with earnest commitment to their irreconcilable positions, showing real emotion, and apparent sincerity? I believe Ford. Not because she is the woman, not because she represents “my side” in open political warfare, but because of the indicia of truth that emanate from the totality of the evidence.
Then you get this crazy chick going off script:
:think:Elizabeth Price Foley is Professor of Law at the Florida International University College of Law.
Applying the preponderance standard to the allegations levied against Kavanaugh, is it more likely than not that he sexually assaulted Ford? No rational decision-maker could so find, for numerous reasons.
First, Ford’s allegations are vague in numerous material details, including time, place and number of individuals present at the alleged event. Second, all individuals Ford claims were present at the event have denied, under penalty of perjury, that it ever took place, including one of Ford’s best girlfriends, Leland Ingram Keyser. Third, Kavanaugh has unequivocally denied ever attending any such event, or ever assaulting Ford at any time. Thus, all alleged participants at the event, except for Ford, agree that the event—much less the sexual assault—never even happened. Fourth, hundreds of character witnesses—many of them women—have provided statements regarding Kavanaugh’s exemplary character since childhood, including his respect for, and long-time mentorship of, women.
....
In short, under the totality of the evidence adduced, there is no rational evidence that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted anyone, including Ford. While some may choose to believe Ford for various reasons—such as believing women, believing Democrats, hating Donald Trump or believing all allegations of sexual assault—such beliefs, while passionately held, are not rational credibility determinations but biased ones. They would never be accepted in any court, or in any other fair decision-making process of a civilized society.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Sometimes a war breaks out and the niceties of “how and why” are lost in existential defence.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Some of those on the Pit don't realize that this particular doesn't victim realize literally anything than the expedient accused's nameJohn D wrote: ↑Woot. I would lose a lot of Facebook friends if I posted this. Her story is very very weak. She was in a house that she did not remember, but she remembered the neighborhood. The neighborhood was too far from her home to walk to or from.... but... she can't remember how she got to the party or got home. She did remember she had exactly one beer however. More than a bit odd I think.
but... she really could be telling the truth. I am a bit more convinced by BK, but I think you are a fool if you think you can be certain of either of these two.
She is terrified to fly because of Kavanaugh, aside from her yearly trips home and flights to the Pacific for surfing... but t Kavanaugh made her terrified to fly. She just can't do it.
Aside from her additional August 2018 flight to see family and take a lie detector test.
Her testimony should be more reliable because she refuses to face critical questioning.
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Because the heavy artillery is brought out only when the nominated justice would change the ideological balance of the court. Why did the Republicans confirm Kagan and Sotomayor when they had control of the Senate, but then deny a hearing to Garland? It wasn't ideology. All three are milquetoast left-leaning judges. And perhaps you've forgotten that even Gorsuch didn't sail through. Rather, for the first time in history, Democrats attempted to filibuster a Supreme Court nomination, which led the GOP to extend the Reid maneuver to Supreme Court confirmations. And had the Democrats not been so stupid and the filibuster was still available, the GOP likely wouldn't have had the votes to end the filibuster under these circumstances, and Kavanaugh's nomination would probably be dead.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ Again, why then was there no 'witch hunt' to frustrate trump with Gorsuch?
I'll bet it wouldn't be too difficult to find you ridiculing this sort of argument in the past in cases like Sulznow or Emma Sulkowicz or Jackie Coakley. It's shocking how easily you abandon your usual good sense when it's politically expedient to do so. You want what she says to be true, and what he says to be bullshit, and nearly everything you've said of their respective credibilities reeks of motivated reasoning and/or confirmation bias.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ I'm wondering if you've ever experienced a truly traumatic, life-threatening event in your life, to be so unrealistic about how memories and trauma actually work.
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
It's foolhardy to consider the ephemera in their presentations, like their exact choice of words or particulars in their demeanor, as evidence. This is the province of those with pre-existing biases who are looking to confirm them. It would be easy to critique Ford's description of her assault by the standards some are using with Kavanaugh. What sort of victim when giving an account of their trauma talks about what anatomical part of their brain was processing and what neurotransmitter was being released. It's not coaching because that was too bizarre to be the product of coaching. But, even giving her the benefit of the doubt, they're clearly the words of someone who has put their recollection of events through some heavy duty filtering and rehearsing, which makes it hard to draw any conclusions from what she says. I give stuff like this very little weight and focus only on real tangible evidence, which is completely lacking here.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Unfortunately I think BK will be confirmed since the R's have come up with a clever strategy. The sacrificial lamb, Jeff Flake has volunteered to piss off the base by demanding a "time limited investigation" (key). Not a long thorough investigation, since if it goes over the midterm elections there's a good chance the Dems will regain control of the senate, and at that point BK is toast. Flake doesn't give a shit since he's retiring. The FBI won't find anything significant (after 38 years how could they?), and K will be confirmed in a week. Unless: Dems come up with something really juicy, a smoking gun as it were. How that will be possible after already seemingly blowing their wad is anyone's guess. Someone will have to step forward with a great story to tell, or some bit of material evidence will need to be discovered that indicates BK is Satan. Odds are the FBI won't find it.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
You must have lived experience of racism/sexism/transphobia, you cis white male, otherwise your opinion is invalid.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Does falling 65 feet off a roof count? or nearly being hit by a swinging skip of concrete? or being set on fire by an exploding oil heater? or being run over by a hit & run driver when you were a child?Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ I'm wondering if you've ever experienced a truly traumatic, life-threatening event in your life, to be so unrealistic about how memories and trauma actually work.
If so then the answer is YES.
https://i.imgur.com/5fZ7QH3.png
-
- Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
- Posts: 5059
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
- Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Worth a watch...
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Generally I think it's true that men are less vulnerable to rumination over the dangers of life than women. And men are much more threatening physically than women, so any trauma that involves physical threat has much more impact on women. Imagine living in a world populated by gorillas; the strength differential is probably comparable. At any given moment you are at the physical mercy of the good vs. bad men about you. It's a significant psychological influence.
At the same time, life is just so much more fucking dangerous for men than women. You're more vulnerable to violence, accident, and health issues. I think men adopt a c'est la vie attitude as a matter of course and generally don't ruminate on trauma. Generally, of course; I'm not talking about specific instances. As reported, women tend to be impacted for life by past events to a much greater extent than men.
At the same time, life is just so much more fucking dangerous for men than women. You're more vulnerable to violence, accident, and health issues. I think men adopt a c'est la vie attitude as a matter of course and generally don't ruminate on trauma. Generally, of course; I'm not talking about specific instances. As reported, women tend to be impacted for life by past events to a much greater extent than men.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I don't think Flake is in thrall to the GOP anymore, but I do agree that an FBI investigation is not going to be much help and the fact there will be little or no hard evidence, and some doubtful memories to interrogate will turn up nothing conclusive and be used to whitewash BK. The only useful thing might be if the FBI were to repeat Ford's polygraph and request Kavanaugh and Judge to undergo polygraphs. I would expect them to refuse if guilty and that refusal ought to be something the senate takes into account.Hunt wrote: ↑ Unfortunately I think BK will be confirmed since the R's have come up with a clever strategy. The sacrificial lamb, Jeff Flake has volunteered to piss off the base by demanding a "time limited investigation" (key). Not a long thorough investigation, since if it goes over the midterm elections there's a good chance the Dems will regain control of the senate, and at that point BK is toast. Flake doesn't give a shit since he's retiring. The FBI won't find anything significant (after 38 years how could they?), and K will be confirmed in a week. Unless: Dems come up with something really juicy, a smoking gun as it were. How that will be possible after already seemingly blowing their wad is anyone's guess. Someone will have to step forward with a great story to tell, or some bit of material evidence will need to be discovered that indicates BK is Satan. Odds are the FBI won't find it.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Peez goes fishing for edgelord strokes and the Horde assures him he is not someone to be fucked with. Every day is Re-run Day at Pharyngula.
https://imgur.com/jjRGUS6.png
Wasn't he recently lamenting his 40 years of civic inactivity? He coulda, shoulda, woulda done something to thwart Reagan, Newt, Dubya.
Whatever he's doing to make up for it looks exactly like tugging his dick on Twitter.
https://i.imgur.com/E5pZq3v.jpg
https://imgur.com/jjRGUS6.png
Wasn't he recently lamenting his 40 years of civic inactivity? He coulda, shoulda, woulda done something to thwart Reagan, Newt, Dubya.
Whatever he's doing to make up for it looks exactly like tugging his dick on Twitter.
https://i.imgur.com/E5pZq3v.jpg
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Things seemed to have died down a bit - let's see if this defibrillates things a bit...
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Correction here; Republicans did not control the Senate when Kagan and Sotomayor were confirmed, although they did still have the fillibuster available and didn't use it, and a significant number of GOP senators voted for confirmation. I had forgotten both nominations occurred in the first half of Obama's first term. Garland was the first Democratic nominee that required Republican confirmation in an extremely long time. In this climate, it appears there's no way a nominee will get confirmed if the Senate is controlled by the opposing party, which is an untenable situation.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑Because the heavy artillery is brought out only when the nominated justice would change the ideological balance of the court. Why did the Republicans confirm Kagan and Sotomayor when they had control of the Senate, but then deny a hearing to Garland? It wasn't ideology. All three are milquetoast left-leaning judges. And perhaps you've forgotten that even Gorsuch didn't sail through. Rather, for the first time in history, Democrats attempted to filibuster a Supreme Court nomination, which led the GOP to extend the Reid maneuver to Supreme Court confirmations. And had the Democrats not been so stupid and the filibuster was still available, the GOP likely wouldn't have had the votes to end the filibuster under these circumstances, and Kavanaugh's nomination would probably be dead.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ Again, why then was there no 'witch hunt' to frustrate trump with Gorsuch?
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
The purpose behind the Democratic demand for an FBI investigation has always been to delay the confirmation vote, not to find the truth. When it inevitably comes back within a week inconclusive, Democrats will insist that more investigation is needed and the deadline initially agreed to will suddenly become arbitrary. However, Collins and Murkowsky will both have the political cover they need and Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed at the end of next week with a couple of Red State Dems joining in. Even if they were successful in delaying the vote until the midterms, and they won control of the Senate (which is certainly feasible but less than 50% probability at the moment), Kavanaugh could be confirmed in the lame duck session following the election. The only real chance of preventing Kavanaugh from being confirmed is information damaging enough to prompt both Collins and Murkowsky to vote against confirmation.screwtape wrote: ↑
I don't think Flake is in thrall to the GOP anymore, but I do agree that an FBI investigation is not going to be much help and the fact there will be little or no hard evidence, and some doubtful memories to interrogate will turn up nothing conclusive and be used to whitewash BK. The only useful thing might be if the FBI were to repeat Ford's polygraph and request Kavanaugh and Judge to undergo polygraphs. I would expect them to refuse if guilty and that refusal ought to be something the senate takes into account.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
So use the search function, smartass.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑ I'll bet it wouldn't be too difficult to find you ridiculing this sort of argument in the past in cases like Sulznow or Emma Sulkowicz or Jackie Coakley. It's shocking how easily you abandon your usual good sense when it's politically expedient to do so. You want what she says to be true, and what he says to be bullshit, and nearly everything you've said of their respective credibilities reeks of motivated reasoning and/or confirmation bias.
You'll find I initially lent credence to Karen Stollznow's accusation, then in the face of growing evidence, came to the firm conclusion she was a pathological liar.
That I concluded that Shermer was a sleaze who had a one-night stand with Alison Smith, but also that Smith was also looking to get laid and proceeded consensually, and that her claim of rape was unfounded as she remembered nothing due to alcohol blackout.
That I doubt PZ actually committed sexual harassment, only that his actions surrounding the accusation were unethical and hypocritical.
That I noted how Sulcowizc repeatedly contradicted herself in public statements.
That I rejected many of the initial accusations against Krauss, believed he tried to score with Malady but also that Malady was down with some fooling around and was distorting events, but eventually concluded Krauss was a serial harasser based on mounting, credible evidence.
Now, point out my motivated reasoning and confirmation bias, or how I failed to apply the above measures to BK.
Actually, after the slew of strained ad hoc excuses you've made for BK's lies, either stick to tone policing the Pit, or just fuck off.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
You actually know the intentions of the Democrat senators? Or are you simply presuming a political calculus at work? Because the first involves some pretty impressive legwork or mind-reading. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing, I'm simply pointing out everybody is employing some degree of presumption in the Kavanaugh debate.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑The purpose behind the Democratic demand for an FBI investigation has always been to delay the confirmation vote, not to find the truth. When it inevitably comes back within a week inconclusive, Democrats will insist that more investigation is needed and the deadline initially agreed to will suddenly become arbitrary. However, Collins and Murkowsky will both have the political cover they need and Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed at the end of next week with a couple of Red State Dems joining in. Even if they were successful in delaying the vote until the midterms, and they won control of the Senate (which is certainly feasible but less than 50% probability at the moment), Kavanaugh could be confirmed in the lame duck session following the election. The only real chance of preventing Kavanaugh from being confirmed is information damaging enough to prompt both Collins and Murkowsky to vote against confirmation.screwtape wrote: ↑
I don't think Flake is in thrall to the GOP anymore, but I do agree that an FBI investigation is not going to be much help and the fact there will be little or no hard evidence, and some doubtful memories to interrogate will turn up nothing conclusive and be used to whitewash BK. The only useful thing might be if the FBI were to repeat Ford's polygraph and request Kavanaugh and Judge to undergo polygraphs. I would expect them to refuse if guilty and that refusal ought to be something the senate takes into account.
I'm sort of surprised at the amount of support a highly religious nutjob like Kavanaugh enjoys in the pit. Like Brive, are we hoping for the emergence of a kind, gentle, state-sponsored religion? What possible thing does he represent that should earn your support? Or is this just another "own the libs" thing again? And please spare me anything about the man being derailed, what a fucking injustice. There's thousands worse every day that doesn't rise to this level of support on the pit.
-
- .
- Posts: 6555
- Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is such a silly little bobblehead. And you, shoutinghorse, can just carry on sending your photoshopped "any gender bathroom" posters round your bridge club email llist.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Also, somebody clear up this Kavanaugh mystery. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article ... ssion=true That alone should give anyone pause before supporting this man. Unless, of course, you've already made your mind up.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I linked to that article expressly because it presented differing views to consider. Funny how after all these years at the Pit, I'm being accused of tendentiousness on this topic.Brive1987 wrote: ↑I read this through. The base question (who do you find more credible?) strikes me as odd. Apparent credibility is a poor substitute for “does the case against BK meet a reasonable test, and what are the KPIs for reasonable”
[....]
Then you get this crazy chick going off script:
[....]
What I see throughout your comments is a narrow focus on whether Blasey-Ford's testimony would meet the standard of sufficient evidence for conviction in a criminal trial. It wouldn't*; but this is not a criminal trial, rather a confirmation hearing for an appointment. The burden of proof rests on the nominee to show he is worthy of the office. wrt the accusations, if it can be shown that they are consistent with BK's behavior and activities during the times in question (& the pieces for that have already started to rapidly fall into place), AND no evidence can be found to expressly rule out the plausibility of all the accusations, then the bar has not been met, and the candidate must be rejected.
Above and beyond the specific allegations of sexual assault, the process has revealed a lengthy and pervasive pattern of pathological lying by the nominee, coupled with strong indications of severe character flaws including alcohol abuse, an explosive temper, excessive political partisanship unsuitable for a judge, a sense of entitlement and the assumption that the rules don't apply to him.
* Hell, my friend got raped earlier this year. But it was by her ex-BF, and she'd been stupid enough to let him couch surf. The cops found her eminently "credible", the DA too, but declined to prosecute due to a dearth of evidence -- plus the above-mentioned circumstances. And guess what? He's a raging alcoholic and truly remembered nothing cuz he'd blacked out. I told my friend the DA's decision was unsurprising & understandable. (They're finally dinging him on violating a prior restraining order.) But hey, per your criterion, that's no bar to this dude becoming a supreme court justice.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I see Katie Hopkins has handled the re-make of Farmlands:
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Twat!ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑ Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is such a silly little bobblehead. And you, shoutinghorse, can just carry on sending your photoshopped "any gender bathroom" posters round your bridge club email llist.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
The bitter, MGTOW, all-bitches-lie vibe is disturbing. I considered the Pit a place where folks could objectively apply logic & reason to determine which bitches be lyin' and which bitches be telling the truth.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I'm sort of surprised at the amount of support a highly religious nutjob like Kavanaugh enjoys in the pit.
It's also discouraging that in a place where once we could both troll the baboons with mock anti-semitism and engage in a vigorous, scholarly debunking of holocaust denial, Miss Manners is now tsk-tsking the stunningly obvious observation that Linsday Graham is a raging, closeted poof.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Why do you want to hurt his lovely wife and daughters? Have you no shame?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, somebody clear up this Kavanaugh mystery. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article ... ssion=true That alone should give anyone pause before supporting this man. Unless, of course, you've already made your mind up.
[/non sequitur dodge]
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
No mindreading required. How exactly would you explain that the Democrats sat on this accusation for months and then unleashed it only when its primary effect would have been to delay the confirmation vote. All for a process that, as Joe Biden mentioned in his now-famous tirade during the Thomas hearings, does not lead to conclusions. In fact, when Feinstein was doing her customary interview of Kavanaugh in the summer, she already had the accusation letter, but didn't ask him anything about it, even though his response may very well have been incriminating. Clearly, this issue was thought to be more valuable as a weapon that could throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings late in the process rather than something that needed to be impartially investigated further expeditiously.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑You actually know the intentions of the Democrat senators? Or are you simply presuming a political calculus at work? Because the first involves some pretty impressive legwork or mind-reading. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing, I'm simply pointing out everybody is employing some degree of presumption in the Kavanaugh debate.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑ The purpose behind the Democratic demand for an FBI investigation has always been to delay the confirmation vote, not to find the truth. When it inevitably comes back within a week inconclusive, Democrats will insist that more investigation is needed and the deadline initially agreed to will suddenly become arbitrary. However, Collins and Murkowsky will both have the political cover they need and Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed at the end of next week with a couple of Red State Dems joining in. Even if they were successful in delaying the vote until the midterms, and they won control of the Senate (which is certainly feasible but less than 50% probability at the moment), Kavanaugh could be confirmed in the lame duck session following the election. The only real chance of preventing Kavanaugh from being confirmed is information damaging enough to prompt both Collins and Murkowsky to vote against confirmation.
I'm sort of surprised at the amount of support a highly religious nutjob like Kavanaugh enjoys in the pit. Like Brive, are we hoping for the emergence of a kind, gentle, state-sponsored religion? What possible thing does he represent that should earn your support? Or is this just another "own the libs" thing again? And please spare me anything about the man being derailed, what a fucking injustice. There's thousands worse every day that doesn't rise to this level of support on the pit.
There's no evidence he's a religious nutjob, just a mainstream Catholic along the same lines as Roberts and Alito. Or are you revisiting one the worst aspects of New Atheism and calling anyone who is religious a nutjob? His judicial record is entirely consistent with being an originalist, with no evidence of religious belief overriding that. I do find it ironic that if his nomination fails because of Murkowski and Collins, it will have been due to Roy Moore, a true religious nutjob.
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
It's come up already here. He received financial help from his family.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, somebody clear up this Kavanaugh mystery. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article ... ssion=true That alone should give anyone pause before supporting this man. Unless, of course, you've already made your mind up.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
If you were a true skeptic you should just assume she is a liar.
How do you know this? Were you there? Were there 4 male witnesses to prove it?
* Hell, my friend got raped earlier this year.
If you were a true skeptic you should just assume she is a liar.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Is there anybody here that thinks "The Devil's Triangle" is a drinking game?
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I thought it had been debunked sometime in the 1970s.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ ere anybody here that thinks "The Devil's Triangle" is a drinking game?
Those boats have been accounted for.
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Is there anybody here that thinks "The Devil's Triangle" is a drinking game?
Maybe it was in part that she reported it immediately rather than wait 35 years. And FFS, a hyperskepticism charge. What is this, Pharyngula circa 2014?free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Matt Cavanaugh wrote:How do you know this? Were you there? Were there 4 male witnesses to prove it?
* Hell, my friend got raped earlier this year.
If you were a true skeptic you should just assume she is a liar.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Again, while you have some evidence about the Democrat senators, you're still visiting their intentions. Possibly entirely correctly, but still a presumption. They gave a plausible explanation that may be entirely correct.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑No mindreading required. How exactly would you explain that the Democrats sat on this accusation for months and then unleashed it only when its primary effect would have been to delay the confirmation vote. All for a process that, as Joe Biden mentioned in his now-famous tirade during the Thomas hearings, does not lead to conclusions. In fact, when Feinstein was doing her customary interview of Kavanaugh in the summer, she already had the accusation letter, but didn't ask him anything about it, even though his response may very well have been incriminating. Clearly, this issue was thought to be more valuable as a weapon that could throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings late in the process rather than something that needed to be impartially investigated further expeditiously.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑You actually know the intentions of the Democrat senators? Or are you simply presuming a political calculus at work? Because the first involves some pretty impressive legwork or mind-reading. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing, I'm simply pointing out everybody is employing some degree of presumption in the Kavanaugh debate.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑ The purpose behind the Democratic demand for an FBI investigation has always been to delay the confirmation vote, not to find the truth. When it inevitably comes back within a week inconclusive, Democrats will insist that more investigation is needed and the deadline initially agreed to will suddenly become arbitrary. However, Collins and Murkowsky will both have the political cover they need and Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed at the end of next week with a couple of Red State Dems joining in. Even if they were successful in delaying the vote until the midterms, and they won control of the Senate (which is certainly feasible but less than 50% probability at the moment), Kavanaugh could be confirmed in the lame duck session following the election. The only real chance of preventing Kavanaugh from being confirmed is information damaging enough to prompt both Collins and Murkowsky to vote against confirmation.
I'm sort of surprised at the amount of support a highly religious nutjob like Kavanaugh enjoys in the pit. Like Brive, are we hoping for the emergence of a kind, gentle, state-sponsored religion? What possible thing does he represent that should earn your support? Or is this just another "own the libs" thing again? And please spare me anything about the man being derailed, what a fucking injustice. There's thousands worse every day that doesn't rise to this level of support on the pit.
There's no evidence he's a religious nutjob, just a mainstream Catholic along the same lines as Roberts and Alito. Or are you revisiting one the worst aspects of New Atheism and calling anyone who is religious a nutjob? His judicial record is entirely consistent with being an originalist, with no evidence of religious belief overriding that. I do find it ironic that if his nomination fails because of Murkowski and Collins, it will have been due to Roy Moore, a true religious nutjob.
While I don't consider every religious person a nutjob, a judge making a big deal about his faith, especially when it is supposed to help exonerate him, yeah, I call nutjob. YMMV. I am actually of the opinion that judges should keep their faith or lack thereof to themselves and simply be good judicial boys and girls. A radical opinion, but I like it.
Kavanaugh was chosen because he's pro-life, but most especially because the little toady believes sitting presidents are above the law. That is the main reason he was chosen.
And complaining about the timing of the Democrats move when Republicans have been sitting on information...hmmm...again, people failing at the Democrats seem entirely complacent about the Republicans. Odd, that.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Again, somebody tell me why, exactly, you support Kavanaugh? He squirms, doesn't answer questions, has temper tantrums...what positions does he support that make you think this gonnarhea weasel should be on the SCOTUS? Genuinely curious.
-
- .
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I have no idea, but when I was a teenager, my friends and I frequently came up with idiosyncratic, jokey names for games. Kavanaugh's claim is very specific and easy to refute, and it was made under oath so I find it highly unlikely he made that up to cover for something salacious. If he did, my opinion of him and his fitness to be a SC justice would definitely be affected.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Is there anybody here that thinks "The Devil's Triangle" is a drinking game?
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
I like Kavanaugh. Super smart guy. I actually like the idea of Catholics on the SCOTUS.... they seem well suited for this. I find him to be pretty genuine and well put together considering the crazy process he has to go through. He is a bit quirky.... but nothing he does is off putting to me. Is that detailed enough?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Again, somebody tell me why, exactly, you support Kavanaugh? He squirms, doesn't answer questions, has temper tantrums...what positions does he support that make you think this gonnarhea weasel should be on the SCOTUS? Genuinely curious.
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
At least it wasn't 'The Dirty Pint' :puke-front:
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
So maybe they should depose Kavanaugh friend Judge to find out...no, they decided not to do that. So very odd.
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
PS - I watched almost all of the hearings... so I can at least say I have been watching. This could really just be proof that I am an idiot however.John D wrote: ↑I like Kavanaugh. Super smart guy. I actually like the idea of Catholics on the SCOTUS.... they seem well suited for this. I find him to be pretty genuine and well put together considering the crazy process he has to go through. He is a bit quirky.... but nothing he does is off putting to me. Is that detailed enough?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Again, somebody tell me why, exactly, you support Kavanaugh? He squirms, doesn't answer questions, has temper tantrums...what positions does he support that make you think this gonnarhea weasel should be on the SCOTUS? Genuinely curious.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Importantly, which directions do you think his rulings will lean that will be favorable? I understand he's terrible on 4th Amendment. For someone such as yourself, lacking trust in the police, he seems a bad choice.John D wrote: ↑I like Kavanaugh. Super smart guy. I actually like the idea of Catholics on the SCOTUS.... they seem well suited for this. I find him to be pretty genuine and well put together considering the crazy process he has to go through. He is a bit quirky.... but nothing he does is off putting to me. Is that detailed enough?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Again, somebody tell me why, exactly, you support Kavanaugh? He squirms, doesn't answer questions, has temper tantrums...what positions does he support that make you think this gonnarhea weasel should be on the SCOTUS? Genuinely curious.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
A thin excuse that may or may not be true. My family is fairly wealthy, but if I asked for a couple hundred grand for baseball tickets, they'd probably bust a gut laughing. Then they'd release the hounds. Again.jugheadnaut wrote: ↑It's come up already here. He received financial help from his family.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, somebody clear up this Kavanaugh mystery. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article ... ssion=true That alone should give anyone pause before supporting this man. Unless, of course, you've already made your mind up.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...
Sure, feminists often say that, and are grossly guilty of hypocrisy here. But in reply to Matt...are you saying that Matt is a feminist and therefore should not judge Kavanaugh on his outbursts? Because I don't agree with feminists. I think men should be calm and measured, especially when they're being considered for SCOTUS. And actually I'd like the same from women SCOTUS judges too. Crazy, right? And though the feminists are guilty of hypocrisy, I agree with them that some of those tears were for effect.Really? wrote: ↑Wait. Wait. The SJWs whined and complained that when a woman expresses emotion, she is considered hysterical. Damn social rules. Men are allowed to show emotion.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:37 amFrankly, I'm astonished that any objective observer could watch the calm, articulate testimony of Blasey-Ford, then the petulant, abrasive temper tantrum of Bart Boof, and conclude that the former is delusional/a lying bitch while the latter is honest, calm, a beacon of ethical standards, with an even keel and impeccable sense of objectivity.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... gress.html
But not all of you are objective, now are you?
Kavanaugh gets angry that he is accused of multiple gang rapes, and he is pilloried for showing emotion. You have to pick one. It can't be both.
Is showing emotion good or bad when discussing very serious matters? How do we apply this standard according to gender. I am that strange person who doesn't want to bring gender into it, but the SJWs have replaced evidence with their own standards.