FORD’S RIDICULOUS DEMANDS

floridafan said:
Its gonna go the way its gonna go, and nothing you can say will change it. I still believe that if she comes across as a compelling witness, Kav will never be confirmed.
Click to expand...
What do you think she'll try to be "irresistible"?'
 
If we didn't elect a piece-of-shit president

who nominates piece-of-shit Supreme Course justice candidates,

we wouldn't be in this situation and the Ford women wouldn't be relevant to Senate hearings.

No matter how it turns out, Trumpanzees must be held accountable by our sane citizens.

They're all--man, woman, or child--perverted criminals without exception.
 
floridafan said:
The word is compelling.
Click to expand...
"evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way"....a compelling performance... One of the definitions, I'm sure you know...
It's going to be pretty impossible for her to provide "evidence " that can't be refuted....considering what she's provided....
 
Teflon Don said:
Two things

1) If there is a statute of limitations, then that would also apply to the FBI correct?

2) Maryland doesn't have a statute of limitations when it comes to sexual assault crimes



You guys are so uninformed
Click to expand...

She is not looking for a criminal case against this man, only to question his qualifications for a seat on the SC. I am quite sure that if his computer was found to be full of kiddie porn, you would still demand that he be seated on the court.
 
TOP said:
"evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way"....a compelling performance... One of the definitions, I'm sure you know...
It's going to be pretty impossible for her to provide "evidence " that can't be refuted....considering what she's provided....
Click to expand...

This is not a court of law, she does not need to provide evidence, only her testimony.
 
floridafan said:
This is not a criminal or civil proceeding, so as long as we hear both people out, what difference does it make.
Click to expand...

We'll all remember that in here when folks here asked for a link or proof. We can just say, "You go first...prove what I'm saying is false." :cool:
 
floridafan said:
She is not looking for a criminal case against this man, only to question his qualifications for a seat on the SC. I am quite sure that if his computer was found to be full of kiddie porn, you would still demand that he be seated on the court.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how an minor (no rape involved, nor clothes removal) incident that happened 30+ years ago when the man was a teenager (child) is grounds to say he is unqualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. At least Justice Thomas was an adult at the time of Hill's claim.
 
They're making a movie about Brian Banks.....now that woman must have been a very "compelling" liar....
 
Grumpy said:
I fail to see how an minor (no rape involved, nor clothes removal) incident that happened 30+ years ago when the man was a teenager (child) is grounds to say he is unqualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. At least Justice Thomas was an adult at the time of Hill's claim.
Click to expand...

Attempted rape is no big deal to you? One of the reasons Mrs. Ford came forward is that she believes he may be a serial molester. Its almost unheard of for a person to do something like this only 1 time in his entire life. Most likely there are other instances and other women who hopefully will come forward.
 
floridafan said:
Nor does he, but they will be under oath. I cannot conceive of a person who is lying, and then asking the FBI to investigate.
Furthermore, she did pass a polygraph exam.
Click to expand...
the private*‘polygraph...lol
Why was that administred> Not that is counts for anything...but it may work against her, when all is said and done....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top